« first day (3660 days earlier)      last day (1272 days later) » 

3:32 AM
The base space is a topological space, right? So what are the open sets?
(probably a dumb question)
 
4:11 AM
Yes.
There are open space too representable through sets.
 
4:47 AM
@RewCie I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say
 
@NiharKarve Open Spaces can be represented with sets. That's what I've said.
see this
In mathematics, particularly in topology, an open set is an abstract concept generalizing the idea of an open interval in the real line. The simplest example is in metric spaces, where open sets can be defined as those sets which contain a ball around each of their points (or, equivalently, a set is open if it doesn't contain any of its boundary points); however, an open set, in general, can be very abstract: any collection of sets can be called open, as long as the union of an arbitrary number of open sets in the collection is open, the intersection of a finite number of open sets is open, and...
 
Sorry, I should have been clearer - I was asking about the relation between the open sets in the total space and base space in a fibre bundle
 
No idea about Fibre Bundle
 
5:03 AM
Oh never mind, I got it - the projection map bestows the quotient topology
 
5:31 AM
How to control anger?
 
6:18 AM
@PrateekMourya meditation
 
A squeeze ball works wonders
 
7:02 AM
@PrateekMourya Go to bath
 
 
2 hours later…
8:45 AM
Alright now after talking
 
9:09 AM
That's usually the best way to release anger.
 
9:33 AM
Do you guys know about ScienceClic?
I loved their last video on QFT and would love to hear some other opinions
 
I'm very skeptical of anything that contains the words "QFT" and "visualized" without a "cannot be" in between :P
4
 
I was too! But the video does its job, I think
 
man, SE is a strange place
 
It gives a slow, step by step entrance, of QM, what's wrong with it, and the foundations of QFT. It should probably mention that the images one sees in the video aren't to be taken literally, but it covers the concepts of symmetries, spin, and superposition pretty well.
 
10
Q: What does the dipole moment really represent?

ric.sanWikipedia gives the most general expression for the $n^{\rm th}$ moment $\mu_n$ of a physical quantity $\Lambda$ as: $$ \mu_n = \int {\bf x}^n \space \lambda({\bf x}) \space \rm d^3 x$$ provided that we know the spatial distribution density $\lambda({\bf x})$ of $\Lambda$. Here are some examples ...

this thing goes on HNQ
which I can completely understand
but then so does this one
6
Q: Why is a symmetric traceless tensor zero when averaged over all directions?

KvanteKaffeIn page 168 in Ref. [1], the authors search for a suitable order parameter for the nematic phase in liquid crystal. If $\vec v^\alpha$ is the direction of a single molecule, than due to the inversion symmetry, both $\vec v^\alpha$ and $-\vec v^\alpha$ contribute to order so the order parameter mu...

like, seriously?
it literally starts off with "In page 168 in Ref. [1], the authors ..." and it only gets more technical as you get on
 
9:47 AM
@EmilioPisanty how are the HNQ decided? I'm guessing it's a bit more complicated than just 'most upvotes'
 
@user6232128 no, views are not counted
@NiharKarve it is indeed a bit more complicated than just 'most upvotes'
 
@MauroGiliberti Yeah, from the first few minutes I think the "visualization" there doesn't really do all that much except not being completely wrong, but the author clearly knows what he's talking about (even if he adopts the "particles are disturbances in the field" language which, while widespread, doesn't really correspond to anything in the formalism (particles are created by the fields in the operator formalism, they are not related to the value of the field))
 
with the literal meaning of "bit"
110
Q: What are the criteria for questions to be selected for Hot Network Questions?

Maxim ZaslavskyI really like the new Stack Exchange home page, where certain questions from the Stack Exchange Network are presented, along with a hotness rating that is described as "arbitrary" in its tooltip. Such questions also appear randomly on the sidebar on questions across the network, under the heading...

(MIN(AnswerCount, 10) * QScore) / 5 + AnswerScore
-------------------------------------------------
         (QAgeInHours + 1) ^ 1.4
 
@EmilioPisanty 3 answers in a short timespan can push questions into HNQ pretty fast on our site. I do believe that we have so many "simple" and "speculative" questions getting into HNQ because there often are many users who can answer them or want to take a guess at it.
 
9:54 AM
@ACuriousMind yeah, that's probably what did it
 
@ACuriousMind I agree, but the concept of "void state" on which the operator acts to create a particle can be complicated and I don't think it gives a much deeper understanding (to the general public)
 
@EmilioPisanty how did they come up with the 1.4 exponent?
 
@user6232128 no idea
 
ok, thanks
 
that formula almost certainly traces its origin to the slightly-different one used on Stack Overflow proper
202
Q: What formula should be used to determine "hot" questions?

Jeff AtwoodRight now the front page Popular tab is fairly broken -- it's a simple descending sort by views. As Joel said in podcast #18, it is "a self-fulfilling prophecy." But this is not intentional, it's only because we haven't had time to improve it yet! As I sit down to write a better algorithm, I thou...

that one's got a ^1.5 exponent
and a link to a previous usage on Y Combinator
that's presumably where the (t+offset)^power formulation came from
the dial-down from 1.5 to 1.4 reduces the turnover by a smidge, which I guess was the intention
 
10:22 AM
"Because of energy conservation, the time reversal operator commutes
with the Hamiltonian." My book says this, but it sounds wrong. I guess you could break time reversal symmetry by a magnetic field, but still have energy conservation?
 
@B.Brekke Yeah, time reversal is a discrete symmetry and hence not among the continuous time translation symmetries related to energy conservation by Noether's theorem
 
10:37 AM
@ACuriousMind Right. How about the other way around, if we have time reversal symmetry, must the energy be conserved?
 
I don't think so
 
@ACuriousMind I guess I could suggest an example where the energy goes as $\cos{\omega t}$, but I don't know any physical example
 
Qmechanic shows that if you have time reversal symmetry around every point in time, you also have translation symmetry, hence energy conservation
 
It would be interesting to find an example which has time reversal around at least one point but not all, and I guess this would have to be an example where energy is not conserved
 
10:56 AM
Having time reversal at one point isn't too hard
just add an even function in $t$
 
@Slereah Ah, of course
 
11:25 AM
The Singles' Day (Chinese: 光棍节) or Double 11 (Chinese: 双11), originally called Bachelors' Day, is a Chinese unofficial holiday and shopping season that celebrates people who are not in relationships. The date, November 11 (11/11), was chosen because the number "1" resembles a "bare stick" (Chinese: 光棍; pinyin: guānggùn), which is a Chinese Internet slang for a single man who doesn't marry and thus can't add 'branches' to the family tree. The four "1"s also abstractly refer to the demographic group of single people. The holiday has ironically also become a popular date to celebrate relationships...
 
11:39 AM
Again, how is that "Just In"?
 
11:53 AM
At least it relates to today, I guess? :P More seriously, @RewCie, this chat is not a news channel. If you post something here that's not of obvious relevance (i.e. about physics or a currently ongoing discussion about something else), it would be nice if you at least commented on it rather than just posting the link. What do you think about it/why are you posting it? Are you seeking other people's opinions on it? Are you exhilarated/frightened/amused by it?
 
12:04 PM
0
Q: What is the maximum limit of suspension in physicis stack exchange?

DavidToday I came across an account which had been suspended for a very long time. Is there any other instances for such suspensions? What are the probable reasons of very long time suspension? Do anybody thinks that it's worthy or important to create a system set up which will generate some auto...

 
12:26 PM
@ACuriousMind I was disturbed by the sounds of silence in the room so I posted it here to start a discussion.
 
12:56 PM
22
Q: Reference request: Examples of research on a set with interesting properties which turned out to be the empty set

Rodrigo AldanaI've seen internet jokes (at least more than 1) between mathematicians like this one here about someone studying a set with interesting properties. And then, after a lot of research (presumably after some years of work), find out such set couldn't be other than the empty set, making the work of y...

 
I'm struggling to understand this analogy of how ensemble methods work
The probability of the majority of tosses being heads is always 51%, isn't it?
 
In probability theory, the law of large numbers (LLN) is a theorem that describes the result of performing the same experiment a large number of times. According to the law, the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value and will tend to become closer to the expected value as more trials are performed.The LLN is important because it guarantees stable long-term results for the averages of some random events. For example, while a casino may lose money in a single spin of the roulette wheel, its earnings will tend towards a predictable percentage...
@JingleBells A slightly biased coin means it is a special coin which doesn't has 50-50 probability
 
Hmm, so with every flip of the biased coin, what exactly approaches 100%?
"the probability of obtaining a majority of heads" - what does that mean? I can feel it but I can't explain it :D
As I toss the biased coin more and more, I'm going to see the 51-49 ratio clearer with every toss.
 
1:12 PM
Honestly, that line doesn't make sense to me.....
@JingleBells The convergence approaches to 100% as number of trials $\rightarrow \infty$
That's what LLN states
But I don't understand what does the text mean....
 
What approaches 100%?
The ratio of heads? $\frac{heads-tossed}{all-tosses}$?
 
Convergence. It means that as the number of trials are increased, the number of heads/total trials will increase more towards 51%
@JingleBells yes, it'll reach 51%
So, convergence will reach 100%
But, I'm totally confused what the text is trying to say/what LLN has to do here...
 
What's convergence? $\frac{ratio-of-heads}{51}$?
 
Wait till someone else who knows this shows up here.
$\frac{\text{ratio of heads}}{51}\times 100$
^convergence where the total outcomes is 2 in sample space
 
ye, got it
thx, all is clear now
 
1:39 PM
hey, folks
did \newcommand just break on the site?
never mind, I messed up the syntax
 
\newcommand is always broken on the site :P
if you get two posts trying to define the same command on the same page it gets ugly
 
2:07 PM
This is a bit of a specific pitch, but does anyone know if there is a command on overleaf that allows you to start the next line (essentially like pressing enter) without dragging down everything in front where you are on the line? So if I go back along a line to correct something and want to start on the next line I can just press this shortcut instead of having to move manually to the end of the line and then press enter?
I know you can do this in some programming IDE's, seems like something a Latex program like overleaf might have
 
@Charlie press "End", then "Enter"?
 
oh my god where has the end button been my whole life
ty
 
I don't think any IDE has a specific shortcut for that, most frequent users just do that combo so fast you don't realize they're pressing two keys :P
 
I think eclipse has ctrl+enter or shift+enter or something, I remember something like that but idk it's been a long time since I used it :P
I just remember it being very useful
 
huh, you're right (I happen to have Eclipse open), it's shift+enter
 
2:20 PM
:D
 
 
1 hour later…
3:34 PM
@ACuriousMind What about zero dimensional QFT
 
3:46 PM
eh
 
could our universe be the intersection region of two other universes?
 
@geocalc33 unless you can make the question rigorous it cannot be answered.
Our current model for the universe is a manifold + metric that may be infinite or closed - we currently don't know which.
You would have to define what is meant by two manifolds intersecting.
Unless you are thinking of eternal inflation, where the term universe is misused to mean a region in which inflation has stopped.
There have been speculations that two such regions could intersect, and even claims that there is experimental evidence for it, though few people believe this.
 
Why torque equation can only be applied from com axis when it is not rotating about fixed axis
 
A free rotating body, i.e. one not fixed to some axle, has to rotate around an axis through its centre of mass.
 
We know that the angular acceleration of the whole body same from every point on the body
 
3:58 PM
If this wasn't the case momentum wouldn't be conserved because the centre of mass would be accelerating from side to side as it rotated.
 
That is a basic proof that rigid body rotates about its centre of mass when it moves freely
 
well, in principle you can view all motion are rotation+translation w.r.t. to some arbitrary axis, but the question would be why you wouldn't want to choose an axis through the c.o.m. so the rotation and translation parts match what we usually mean by something "moving" or "rotating" in colloquial speech
 
But still why cant we apply torque =ialpha fromany point
Since alpha is same from all point
 
what's "alpha"?
 
Angular acceleration
 
4:03 PM
what do you mean by it being "the same from all point"?
like angular velocity whose derivative it is, it also has to be relative to a given axis/point of origin
 
Angular velocity of a rigid body is fixed from all points
Measured
 
we typically take the rotational/angular motion of a rigid body w.r.t. to its c.o.m.
without a point of origin as a reference, these quantities are meaningless/ill-defined
 
@PrateekMourya we talked about this didn't we? But I can't remember where we got to.
 
Yes we tried to prove that its dame from all points
But we only proved average one but not instantaneous one
4
A: Why is the center of mass frame always used in rigid body dynamics?

John AlexiouYou don't have to, but it makes the equations easier to deal with because you don't have to account for the moment of acceleration terms. See the 2nd part this this answer about deriving Newton's laws on an abitrary point not the center of mass. So finally the equations of motion of a rigid b...

^ suggest why we shouldn't as it make calculation difficult
In principle we can apply from any point but we shouldn't
 
4:53 PM
?
Do you think SE is just randomly banning users for no reason or something?
 
5:03 PM
Comment removed; chat is not the place to discuss specific suspensions, either.
 
I see the phrase "identically zero" used a lot, is this just a fancy way of saying "is zero"?
 
@Charlie it's usually used in the context of functions to emphasize that the function doesn't just take the value "zero" at one point, but everywhere
 
ahh, that makes sense
 
i.e. when someone says "$f(x)$ is identically zero" they don't mean that $f(x) = 0$ for some particular $x$, but they mean that $f$ is the zero function.
 
ok that is useful to know ty
is the converse true? "not identically zero" means can be zero at a point but is not zero everywhere?
 
5:17 PM
sure
 
Does anyone know any exotic subtraction schemes?
 
123
5:40 PM
Yo...
 
hi
 
 
1 hour later…
123
6:44 PM
Hi @Charlie
 
In case you haven't heard, Muon g-2 is due to publish this year. Confirming the standing discrepancy would indicate new particles of 10 MeV to 1000 GeV. And there's less than 2 months left now. The data is out there somewhere… Any rumors on what Muon g-2 will find?
 
7:27 PM
I have seen the pullback of the connection 1-form on a principal bundle onto spacetime called a "Yang-Mills field", but wikipedia says YM theories are those based on SU(N) gauge groups, do we just generally call the gauge fields Yang-Mills fields?
The only example I can think of (and the only one I know) would be QED with U(1)
Maybe a better way to ask would be, is the $A_\mu$ gauge field in QED a Yang-Mills field?
I sense this is an area of mathematics in which physicists and mathematicians use significantly different language, at least from what I've seen so far :P
 
7:41 PM
Weak interaction is SU(2)
Strong interaction is SU(3)
QED is a Yang Mills field, yes
In general you can have all the connections you want, but for QFT there's only so many groups that will give you physical results
 
I see
Thank you
 
Something about the group being semisimple, I think?
@ACuriousMind
 
@Charlie Don't know if this helps, but I was recently reading The Pursuit of Quantum Gravity and the author seems to make the point a couple times that the gauge field is the pullback of the 1-form, but physicists seem to just call the 1-form itself the field...that bit was going completely over my head though
 
8:00 PM
Physicists just have a bunch of components and call it the field usually :p
 
8:14 PM
Anyone have any good statistics resource recommendations? Specifically statistics related to mathematical modeling and relating those models to data, model verification and validation based on the data, model predictions, etc.
 
have your looked around ourworldindata
It's a good place to start imho
your *you
 
@Slereah oh good, the natural extension of the physicist's tensor :D
 
8:32 PM
Tbh the best strategy seems to be to learn what the mathematicians call stuff and then learn the physics translation rather than the other way around :P
As a bonus you'll avoid getting made fun of in the mathematics chat (and by acm) for using physics language
 
@Charlie Do you have an example?
 
Tensors immediately come to mind :P
and lots of things in differential geometry
 
I think we are talking about different things
 
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I was swapping between physics and math resources when learning tensors and it was a struggle. I wish I had been aware of the differences in language back then...or just shut up and happily calculated away the components
 
Unless tensors and differential geometry are often used in the statistics commonly found in mathematical models?
Like comparing the model outputs to the data, looking at the model predictions, etc
Or now that I look back... you weren't talking to me haha
 
8:44 PM
Oh no sorry I was referring to the discussion earlier about how mathematicians and physicists refer to connection forms
 
Yeah my bad; I didn't scroll up haha
 
sorry :P the thought of statistics makes me want to curl into a ball
 
Yeah... I just don't have a good background in it at all
So I want to learn more
 
There must be a resource recommendation thread for that on SE somewhere
 
Yeah probably. I haven't done much searching yet.
 
 
2 hours later…
10:15 PM
@alexchandel "If supersymmetry is realized in nature, there will be corrections to g−2 of the muon due to loop diagrams involving the new particles."
A g-factor (also called g value or dimensionless magnetic moment) is a dimensionless quantity that characterizes the magnetic moment and angular momentum of an atom, a particle or the nucleus. It is essentially a proportionality constant that relates the observed magnetic moment μ of a particle to its angular momentum quantum number and a unit of magnetic moment (to make it dimensionless), usually the Bohr magneton or nuclear magneton. == Definition == === Dirac particle === The spin magnetic moment of a charged, spin-1/2 particle that does not possess any internal structure (a Dirac particle) is...
pretty cool
 
 
1 hour later…
11:22 PM
@Charlie "Yang-Mills" has a narrow meaning where it's only theories with $\mathrm{SU}(N)$ gauge fields, and a broad meaning where it's any gauge theory with Lagrangian $\mathrm{Tr}(F\wedge{\star}F)$
+ $A \wedge {\star}j$ terms coupling it to the charged fields
 
Also, in $\mathrm{tr}(F_{\mu \nu}F^{\mu \nu}) = \mathrm{tr}(F^a_{\mu \nu} T_a F^{b \mu \nu} T_b) = F^a_{\mu \nu} F^{b \mu \nu} \mathrm{tr}(T_a T_b) = F^a_{\mu \nu} F^{b \mu \nu} g_{ab}$, with $T_a$ the group generators, the quantity $g_{ab} = \mathrm{tr}(T_a T_b)$ is the Killing form of a Lie algebra, so if it's not semi-simple $g_{ab}$ will be degenerate meaning not all of the kinetic terms are actually dof
 

« first day (3660 days earlier)      last day (1272 days later) »