In the QHO in regular quantum mechanics the creation-annihilation operators connect the energy eigenstates but they don't (obviously) affect occupation number like those used in QFT. Does there exist operators in QFT that do this? i.e. $$a^\dagger(k)|0\rangle=|k\rangle\in \mathcal H,\quad A^\dagger(z)|k\rangle=|k+z\rangle\in\mathcal H,$$ something like this? Essentially an operator that gives a particle more or less energy

not sure I understand what you mean, would someghint like $a^\dagger(k+z)a(k)|k\rangle = a^\dagger(k+z)|0\rangle = |k+z\rangle$ work for you?

@vzn Is there some kind of classical no-deleting theorem analogue that you know about?

I'm not sure if you're into QC, but you might want to take a look at this

@NiharKarve hi, the question reminds me of the thermodynamic heat death of the universe which states entropy is always increasing and that all the stars will eventually burn out. and another theory that black holes will eventually swallow all other matter. anyway think the no-cloning thm is one of the deep principles of QM but speaking freely here, think it has questionable elements. was looking for anyone else questioning it, but nothing seemed to turn up on a cursory search.

@JMac 🤦

@user131873 Hello

Hi GooD MorNinG...

Yo

@NiharKarve The quantum "no-X theorems" are overhyped and usually don't say anything interesting in their standard formulations, see physics.stackexchange.com/q/296678/50583 :P

Games you can play with area:

@ACuriousMind I am of the view that they're only really there for the conservation of quantum information, although I don't claim to be an expert

@skullpatrol do you know Zimbax? You might find his videos entertaining

Nope, thanks I'll check it out.

In general, do your universities help get you a subscription to scientific journals?

I have a confusion if a rod lying on horizontal which is always perpendicular to one end of rod dow the com remains at rest if yes then how to prove it

@PrateekMourya I have no idea what sort of situation "if a rod lying on horizontal which is always perpendicular to one end of rod dow" is supposed to describe

is the rod lying on a table (why "horizontal"?)? what does it mean for that to be perpendicular "to one end of rod"? Things can't be perpendicular to points, only to vectors/lines/directions. What's a "dow"?

A long cylindrical piece of wood?

@skullpatrol That's a dowel, no?

Yes.

@ACuriousMind do they call that an noun adjunct?

@skullpatrol Why would they?

An adjunct noun/noun adjunct is something entirely different

ok

This is a nominalized adjective, if you really want a fancy word for it

Yup, that's fancy enough for me, thanks.

DISCLAIMER: PROMOTION IS NOT INTENTED. PLEASE REFRAIN FROM ANSWERING:

how to i get "E-1" to the extreme right side? I want to remove the -------->

I have a confusion whether we take amplitude or principal argument in euler form of complex number

@ACuriousMind suppose a rod is lying on a horizontal table or in x-y plane and a force coplanar is is such that it is always perpendicular to one end of the rod

@satan29 you can enclose it in \tag{}

@PrateekMourya go on

@NiharKarve thanks!

MY POST CAN BE IGNORED NOW.

Thanks for the disclaimer :-)

@fqq Yeah I guess that would make sense, thank you

Maybe this is obvious, but if the quantum field operators obtained during second quantisation satisfy an "operator version" of the classical field equations, i.e. we can literally just replace the classical field solutions with the operators in the equations of motion: $$(\partial^2+m^2)\phi(x,t)=0\quad\rightarrow\quad (\partial^2+m^2)\hat \phi(x,t)=0,$$ does this mean that the classical gauge freedom of the $A_\mu$ 4-vector in electrodynamics gains exactly the same freedom as a qft operator?

@Charlie Yes and no :P

just wait until you get to QED is probably the best

alright then :p

the theory you get when you try to do naive canonical quantization of a gauge theory is inconsistent

i.e. the quantization procedure you know now would do exactly what you say but that's not the correct quantization procedure

ah, I did wonder why p&s refer to the quantisation of EM as messy

or complicated, something like that

You can do QED with a "naive" quantization of the gauge and it mostly works

The Gupta Bleuler formalism

Basically doing a quantum version of the Lorenz gauge

Yeah, but even in Gupta-Bleuler you have to be careful how you implement the gauge

if you just implement the full gauge $\partial_\mu A^\mu = 0$ you just kill all the photons, that's why there's this "positive part" $(\partial_\mu A^\mu)^+ = 0$ you end up enforcing

I say let them die

Could I just have a sanity check, two objects of the same mass travelling upwards from the surface of the Earth at different velocities (no acceleration) require exactly the same amount of energy to get $x$ distance from the surface of the Earth, they only differ in the power input required to get them there

Why h bar not lambda?

@Charlie by "no acceleration" you mean that they propel themselves with a variable acceleration that exactly cancels the gravitational acceleration at the current height?

@PrateekMourya what?

if you form complete sentences the probably of someone getting what you're talking about usually increases :P

@PrateekMourya It's half life is infinite

@Slereah 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@Charlie I remember reading this thing.... I forgot what they call it now....🤔

@skullpatrol Hello bro... Do you know a good book on Systems Programming?

@ACuriousMind Yes my bad the situation I was actually thinking of was in a small enough vertical region that $F_g$ is constant

@Charlie in that case yes, they both expend $F_gh$ energy to reach $h$.

Just In: NASA Writes Back To A 9-year-old Who Asked For A Job To Save Earth From Aliens; Read Here Via: RepublicWorld

Ok nice ty

any judgement on my lack of classical mechanics skills will be met with swift legal action

@Charlie Nice, I look forward to being awarded fair compensation for having to deal with that lack

D:

@RewCie And once again, a years-old story that's certainly not "just in". Cf. e.g. washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/08/06/… from Aug 2017. Are you trying to only post things that aren't news?

Okay... Nvm...

🧐

@ACuriousMind Have you ever been to Switzerland?

Yes; I've visited CERN.

Did they let you ride inside the LHC like a waterslide

I've heard that's what they do during the down-season

Woooow! I heard that Switzerlandish people speak German. So, German classes are compulsary for ZTH

@Charlie heck, you can even get accelerated to 0.5c for a lark

@Charlie Wowowowowowowowhat????

If I get LHC for a day, I'll Make a videogame with it.

@Charlie nah, they gave us jetpacks and we had a little race inside the collider ring :P

:O

@ACuriousMind so that's what high energy physicists are talking about when they say "jets"

Just In: A cool game trending on Twitter

The correct pronunciation of data is data.

@ACuriousMind when does the Ehresmann connection beat parallel transport in physical applications?

/ˈdeɪtə/

@NiharKarve yeah, you didn't really buy that ridiculous pretense about particle streams looking like water jets, did you? :P

ₙₒ

@NiharKarve I'm not sure what you mean - an Ehresmann connection defines a notion of parallel transport via the "horizontal lift"

$_{yes}$

not parallel transport, you know, the most common form of it

I actually can't for the life of me remember its name right now

there are three common ways to get around the vectors at different points being part of different tangent spaces: the Ehresmann connection, covariant derivative and ...?

the connection one form?

I was actually going to ask a while ago how unique the correspondance between connection 1-forms and Ehresmann connections is

if you're asking if the idea of a connection as a horizontal/vertical split as in the Ehresmann formalism is ever physically more relevant than the idea of a connection form, I don't think so

Hard

@Charlie yeah, thanks

@ACuriousMind oh ok. I liked its formulation so much though :(

but an Ehresmann connection is equivalent to having a connection form or a notion of parallel transport, so it's a philosophical difference, not a technical one

Are MO and SO same?

er, no?

if you mean MathOverflow and StackOverflow, that is

So, I'll have to create duplicate rooms on both sites?

yes

MathOverflow and StackOverflow

so the choice is one-to-one in the sense that each one uniquely determines the other?

I think the Ehresmann viewpoint is much more geometric and better to visualize, but physically we're not really motivated by the aesthetic of the geometry, but by the idea of having local gauge fields, i.e. we get the bundle by a clutching construction, not by starting with the bundle as the central idea.

so physically the "geometry" of the bundle is more or less accidental, so there's little gain in emphasizing any geometric intuition a mathematician might be interested in

We all are mathematicians inside

@Charlie yes

I see

the connection form is essentially the projection on the vertical part

so you go from the Ehresmann assignment of horizontal/vertical split to a connection form by projecting onto the vertical part at each point, and you go the other way by defining the horizontal space at each point to be the kernel of the connection form

How many of you all are using Windows/Linux OS? I've a very interesting trick to show ya here!

Okay, nvm....

b4n

As in we define the connection 1-form given the Ehresmann connection as the vector valued 1-form whose image is the vertical subspace?

Is it just me or are there way fewer QM/QFT/GR questions around these days?

than, say, a couple of months ago

possibly because peoople aren't cramming for finals :P

@Charlie Yes, and then you concatenate with the isomorphism between the vertical subspaces and the Lie algebra to get it as a algebra-valued form

@RewCie Why the facepalm? You literally said "The question claims it's an "assumption"", and I just pointed out the word "assumption" was not mentioned anywhere on the page. You really say a lot of stuff that doesn't seem to follow. I don't see why you're facepalming me when it's the same stuff I keep pointing out.

ohhhh yeah

physics.stackexchange.com/questions/595786/… Like come on, dude

the "standard vector field" generated by each element of the Lie algebra lies completely within the vertical space at each point

@NiharKarve lol

fundamental vector field I mean

@NiharKarve I can't see analytics for individual tags but it's normal that March-May are the highest-traffic months of the year

so if you compare any activity with what you remember from May you'll always find it's gone down

March-May?

is that finals season or something

yeah

Depends on the country and institution

oh and the JEE thing happens sometime around then if I'm not wrong

But yeah, first half of the year is usually when the finals are

March is generally when I would realize that I had fallen behind in concepts in most of my classes, and May is generally when the exams finished up, so that timeline makes sense to me.

@NiharKarve yes

right now the questions are coming from weirdos who do work for their degree outside of the week before finals

:O

Exactly. Those strange people who try to learn a subject more than a week before the exam.

or mb learn because science is cool

Now I just read and learn stuff because science is cool; but it was a lot less cool when I had to learn it.

is anyone familiar with a "norm?"

Sure

what kind of norm?

A norm is a map from a space to $\mathbb{R}$ with certain properties

maybe he wants to know about social norms :P

Same thing

:o

Norm is short for Norman

I have a norm here, $f:\frac{s}{x}\mapsto s$ which associates each function to a positive real number $s$

so is that indeed the norm? I'm trying to connect it with something else I know

doesn't "the norm" just depend on how you define it?

@geocalc33 You might benefit from learning about normed vector spaces

There is no "the norm", it's an additional datum you choose for a space

@Slereah ah, a utilitiarian :P

"I am the norm" ~ Judge Dredd or something

I'm just learning a bit about function spaces from this document

anyone use Julia at all?

the programming language that is

Oh man, thank god you clarified

I was amazed someone didn't sneak in a joke before that

the h in h bar doesn't stand for horny, that's for sure.

::eyeroll::

apparently making a cloud chamber is easy enough, but you do need dry ice

and the easiest way to make it at home involves a fire extinguisher

which sounds costly to do every time

I was asking who made the h bar chat room

I think it was John

John the Apostle?

@PrateekMourya Every SE site automatically gets a chat room associated with it

John rennie made this room? damn

no John (Rennie or biblical) was involved in the creation of this room

You can just buy dry ice, but it only lasts a day

@Slereah friend of mine did that once as a school project

I guess if I want to do a cloud chamber I'll have to spruce up 40 bucks for a fire extinguisher

Although I guess technically

You just need a cold source

But I don't know if regular ice would cut it

@Slereah Fire extinguishers are often refillable. IDK how much a refill costs though, it may literally just be cheaper to buy new ones.

indico.cern.ch/event/335860/contributions/1729331/attachments/…

Ah yes

Ice and salt sounds a bit cheaper than dry ice

yes

Hm, is there anything in between ice and dry ice, temperature-wise

And that I could do in my freezer

Freeze goes as far as -23°C

@Charlie He is a room owner though

yeah that's what I was basing it off of

When are the Chuck Norris-style facts coming for John Rennie

Hydrogen cyanide mets at -13°C

Jon Skeet has had his share

But that sounds like a bad choice

The paper also proposes to use gel packs for it

And I do have gel packs

@Slereah Maybe a propylene glycol solution of some sort? Not very toxic and you can change the concentrations to change the freezing point.

iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9120/47/4/429

^the paper

@NiharKarve We introduced room owners in '16

60/40 propylene glycol and water solutions freeze at like -48°C, but if you use more water you can tweak that quite a bit. engineeringtoolbox.com/propylene-glycol-d_363.html

Hm, let's see what gel packs I have

For those in the US who haven't committed to a turkey-cooking method, I recommend Mach 5 crossflow for an extra-crispy skin

@ACuriousMind Wow, looking at the transcripts, the chat seemed really active back then

at least in terms of the number of active high rep users

I feel like I missed the golden age

@tpg2114 Slow day at work lol?

@JMac Everybody took off for the week, so it's my chance to get things done! Haha

It actually helped me track down some bugs in the code, so I'm pretty happy with it

It's really about time someone actually did the math on a Mach 5 cooking method. Cooking in my ultra-high velocity convection oven is a mess because apparently most people don't cook like that or something.

I didn't look at the drag on the turkey, but I'm guessing you'd want to really anchor it down

@tpg2114 why not take the easy route and slap it?

or have you guys done that before

Slap it?

Slap the turkey to cook it

yeah I replied to the wrong message lol

I have no idea what you mean by that, and I'm on a work computer so I don't think I'm going to search the internet for "slapping a turkey" cause that seems like it will be a bad idea

@tpg2114 It's easier to just let everything do it's thing and just scrape up whatever food you can recover from the walls of the oven.

That's fair, probably a good way to make mashed potatoes too

The real crazy thing is that I can run a joke simulation of a turkey on my workstation in a few hours, when a comparable-sized simulation for my thesis work just a few years ago needed a supercomputer.

Oh whatever it is you're definitely going to be serving it mashed/

Is it the software and hardware that have improved that much since?

@JMac It's like the fancy pressed duck recipe, only you don't need to manually press the bird to make the gravy. It self-gravies!

Hardware. This is actually the same code I used for my thesis

@tpg2114 have you never seen this?

In 2016, I needed something like 128 processors for a problem of this size and let it run for a day or two. The turkey ran on my workstation that has 80 cores for about 3 hours

How many CPU's does your workstation have in it?

@NiharKarve Hah, I haven't. But fun fact -- the crossflow here is 1700 m/s, so looks like it will cook the turkey pretty fast

Wait do they actually make an 80 core processor wtf

@JMac 80 cores, it's a 2x40 Intel xeon gold setup

@tpg2114 no worries, I too would be hesitant to search "turkey slapping" without a VPN

Although 40 of the cores are hyperthread, which took some work for the code to make use of without killing the regular cores. I think it's only 2x20 physical cores

Oh okay at first I was thinking something like double Xeons, then I looked up "80 core CPU" and actually found a company making one in a single processor apparently.

I think the new AMD's are coming in at 80 core

I'm skeptical they will work well for scientific computing though, last time the supercomputer people built an AMD supercomputer it was really a disaster... but, they seemed to repress that and there's 2 new AMD-based clusters coming online in the spring

It's crazy how quickly stuff like multithreading and hyperthreading took off. I still remember having a Q6600 and most games were only using 1 core.

So I'll have to make the code work on those... Right now, the Intel compiler suite gives us much faster code than GNU. But, on AMD, Intel compilers intentionally slow down the code they generate so I'm going to have to redo a lot of the optimizations

Yeah, although we don't actually thread our code yet. We just treat each thread as it's own process instead

So basically you manually code for "threading" instead of like the compiler or something doing it?

We use the Message Passing Interface (MPI) to communicate between processes. So we explicitly send/receive data when needed.

The MPI library, depending on the vendor, is smart enough to recognize when it's all on the same machine (threaded) or when it's across different machines, and optimize how it does the sending/receiving based on that

So it avoids the need for us to worry about whether we're on 5 threads of a single CPU of 20,000 cores distributed across an entire cluster. But, that comes with an overhead of not being optimal for the threaded case

Does that make it easier to go from like a computer cluster or just a workstation?

Nvm I think you answered that

Yeah, so I don't have to change anything when I run on my workstation or go to a cluster. Just change the number of cores I start the simulation on

Well that probably comes in handy when scaling things up.

Yeah, it's a trade off between developer time, end-user time, and CPU time...

And CPU's tend to complain less

Do you use finite element methods for your modeling (is there even really any other way)?

Hi, I don't know if it is correct to ask here, but is there someone that can help me with a problem about control theory\robotics?

Maybe try the engineering stack exchange

there's even a robotics one : robotics.stackexchange.com

I will try thank you. I hve tried ask it on mathematics stack exchange because it seemed more a mathematical problem, but I will where you suggested .Thank you.

news18.com/news/buzz/…

What?

@BioPhysicist Yeah... what? "In experiment the shape of bodies is very significant. Newton's law has been studied by billions and trillions of people in past 335 years. The law is applied right from the applications of colliding bodies to fireworks and launching of rockets," he said." Apparently there have only ever been ~100 billion humans over the history of Earth... so that seems wrong

I can't really trust someone who thinks trillions of humans have studied Newton's third law in 335 years.

@JMac Sorry, had to hop on a call to offer somebody a job... This is a finite volume code. Finite element doesn't see much use in fluid dynamics actually, although the new hot research area is discontinuous Galerkin methods that sort of unify finite volume and finite element

@tpg2114 Oh okay. My knowledge on that stuff is pretty jumbled. I had a fluid dynamics course that did get into some CFD methods, but because I was non-co-op and we were a pilot year for our program, we took that course before we took numerical methods. So basically all the CFD stuff got into math that I was supposed to understand, but didn't. And I took a FEM course I kinda understood so I'm probably primed to think everything is that lol

I just don't even know what's going on in that article lol. Seems like an April Fool's joke

Reminds me of the Indiana Pi Bill.

Yeah, it's funny cause I took/worked a bunch of CFD before I took a class on FEM, and FEM makes my brain hurt

I just look at it and go "But why would you make it that complicated..."

It's pretty interesting how the structural mechanics world and the fluid dynamics world developed in parallel but isolated, even though the governing equations take the same form at the end of the day. FEM confuses the heck out of me, but then I did some structural mechanics work for my MS thesis using peridynamics, which to me is just finite volume for structures, but to structures people it's like some abomination that breaks all the rules of structural simulations

I surprisingly understood what was going on in FEM better than I expected. I suck at matrix math, so doing any of it by hand was basically out of the question. But I did actually have a good idea about what methods were good where, and how to do some basic FEM using the program we had at university. That was one of those classes for me where I wound up surprised when I came out of it and wasn't clueless.

The math is weird to me, but it's a very useful skill. I find myself projecting onto orthogonal mode shapes surprisingly often when doing data analysis or reduction, or doing uncertainty quantification. Glad I took the class on it, but it still is bewildering to me how it works

I can go through the motions though

Sorry, that word was pun intended, but it seems like 'punded' has some meaning. So I apologise for its incorrect use.

@JMac Ha I had never heard of that

I've never been able to get a good grasp on matrices, and how to relate them to basically anything. Like to this day I need to look up matrix multiplication. It just will not stay in my head in a way that actually allows me to grasp the math well. I'm okay with like "this matrix times another matrix gives us this useful matrix"; but when it comes time to do the operations I have like no intuition on why it works like it does. It's like my mind just can't deal with it.

Have you seen the 3blue1brown linear algebra series?

@JMac 3b1b has a great explanation on it.

Ha I beat you to it

@BioPhysicist ya, my typing got slow.

I had a horrible calc3 / linear algebra / differential equations teacher in undergrad, so I really didn't learn any of the intuitiveness behind those classes

I still, to this day, don't think I've ever computed eigenvalues by hand correctly

I learned more about those things in my physics classes than I did in my math classes

At least not on the first try. It's like plugging in a USB cable... I have to do it 3 times before it works

I can't really get into educational video series I find. I've watched some of those videos (not sure if they were the linear algebra ones though) and my issue is that it "makes sense" when I watch the video; but then afterwords it basically all leaves my mind. I've "understood" matrix math a few times, only to have to disappear from my mind the next day basically.

What about "Linear Algebra Done Right"?

I'm really a fan of computer programs/languages that can do matrix math for me.

Python FTW

@JMac (+1)

I remember learning matrix multiplication in grade school. What is the point in that?

Like they definitely are not teaching the motivation behind the process. So you are just following this weird rule of multiplying a bunch of numbers in boxes and adding the products together

@BioPhysicist Thank god, we have 3b1b these days (YouTube in general).

@BioPhysicist tell me about it

@BioPhysicist Yeah that didn't help. And then when I took an actual linear algebra course in University my professor was like one of those "crazy genius" types, who writes with one hand while erasing with another, all while talking about some weird abstraction of the subject that no one understands at the time. Though when he did that with DE random rants of his came back to me when I was studying and suddenly made sense.

@JMac I feel the same way, but the intuition in the 3b1b series stuck with me, which must mean something haha

Actually, if I were to say the one thing that I'm an expert in, it's NumPy tensors

@JMac I think I would prefer that linear algebra class over an entire semester essentially focused on Gaussian Elimination

My LA class was the last 1/4 of the semester with Calc 2

My DE class was so bad that we also did Gaussian Elimination in that too. And I know there could be applications to DE, but that isn't what happened in that class

@BioPhysicist Lol literally all the testing I remember from the class was just elimination using different algorithms basically. It's just the professor would talk about really complicated aspects of it while teaching us. I'm pretty sure I got an A+ in the class because I could remember the simple algorithms, but the theory was still a total wash.

@tpg2114 Ouch

I think I learned the most linear algebra from Shankar's QM book to be honest

And I had gotten a 5 on the AP Calc B/C test, so I took Calc 2 as an "easy" grade to get started rather than waive it. But that meant I was bored and didn't go to class, so I missed most of the transition to LA and the material until I was very surprised on the final...

Haha wow

I got 5's on the calc / physics AP tests, but my advisor recommended I still take calc 1/2 and the intro physics classes to help build the foundation. I am glad I did it

It's actually kind of ironic that all of my work deals with linear algebra (which I never took a proper class), chemistry (which I haven't taken any class since high school since I AP'd out), and system dynamics (which I got a D in when I took it)

Haha

I actually really enjoyed my DE class. I was doing terrible at it at first; but once I hunkered down to study for the exam I would literally like think of random phrases my prof said that were nonsense at the time, and a bunch of them clicked as I was studying, so that was actually pretty cool.

@tpg2114 I suppose same with me and biology haha

Yeah, in hindsight I would have not waived any classes and actually paid a lot more attention in the ones I did take

Cause I was a pretty terrible undergrad student. I think I graduated with a 2.8.

I'm kinda glad my school didn't really offer AP or anything, because I probably would have been tempted to skip classes and it would have been bad.

@tpg2114 2.3, suck it. (apparently our GPA reset after second year so all my good marks on the intro classes didn't factor into my average for my degree lol)

Makes you wonder about the grading system...

Was getting into uni for you guys as competitive as it is now

I wasn't really aware of the competition when I was applying, and I don't know much about the competition now... so I have no idea :)

I haven't applied to school since 2004 (undergrad) or 2008 (grad), so I don't know

It was competitive then for sure, but I don't know if it's more or less competitive now.

I don't think it is that competitive here. I did get pretty good grades in HS, but not like "work my ass off" good; and got into the program I wanted at the school I wanted without issue. It may have gotten worse in the last 10 years, but I don't think it's too bad here. My province has a really high rate of universities per capita.

Province? Are you Canadian?

Yeah]

zed

Yeah my undergrad wasn't a competitive university, so no issues there. In terms of grad school, I got accepted into 2 places (forget how many I applied to). But I am still surprised I got into the school I am at now given that my undergrad was weak on the research side.

I still say zee, I'm a terrible canadian.

:(

I knew my GPA was going to be terrible, so I managed to get a spot in a research lab as an undergrad and proved I was useful

I guess we were opposites then haha

I never did anything past undergrad, but I did get to make an automated beer brewer for my capstone project... so I'd say things worked out pretty damn well.

I... exaggerated... my skills a bit when I applied. I knew how to program, but mostly C or C++, and the post said they wanted Fortran. So I figured if you know one language, you can learn others easily and said I knew Fortran. The professor called me into his office on a Friday and said "Since you know Fortran, you can start on Monday. We have some code that needs updated, talk to X on Monday and he'll give you a copy."

So I went to the campus bookstore and bought the only book on Fortran they had

@JMac that's nothing short of epic

My numerical methods class used a textbook from 1975, so the coding references were all fortran lol

Fortran is a fantastic language, so long as you use relatively modern standards

Fortran90 onwards is great

Fortran 77 is an abomination.

We just converted all the algorithms to matlab, since it's not like the book required fortran, the code just couldn't be directly copied.

The code used for the turkey is about 300k lines of Fortran with about 200k lines of python for pre/post/utility/testing

Obviously it does a lot more than joke simulations of hypersonic turkeys... haha

Hi, I am working on a problem and I really cannot move on. It is not really physics, so sorry if i post it here, but in case you want, could you please give it a check. Thank you in advance. The problem is:math.stackexchange.com/questions/3919495/…

@J.D. in any case, you probably wanna whittle the question down, it's a bit too long to do much with

re: first comment

yes, you are right, I will try to keep the essential. Thanks for the suggestion.

@NiharKarve you did, pal :-)

@JohnRennie you may like to use this to keep up with the latest news in chemistry, sir @ChemistryNews

@JMac do you still use it?

also, how automated are we talking here? Put raw materials in at one end, wait a few weeks, get beer out the other end?

beer engineering is very relevant to my interests :P

@ACuriousMind Sadly it wasn't mine alone. Our capstone projects were group projects, and my project was even more so, because they decided to test out a "cross-discipline" capstone project where we worked with a group of Chemical Engineers who basically laid down what kinds of targets we had to hit with our system to get different beers.

It was pretty automated. We were going for load it up and leave it; but there were a few steps that were by hand. Mostly adding the hops and putting it into cooling. And the hops was supposed to be automated but the small part we made for it wasn't consistent enough. Overall though it was fairly automated. You just loaded up what you wanted into a raspberry pi and it controlled the pumps and stuff.

huh, pretty cool

anyone know how to combine metrics? $ds_1^2 \otimes ds_2^2= \bigg (\frac{dxdy}{xy}\bigg)\bigg( \frac{dxdy}{y-xy} \bigg)$?

Definitely a very interesting project. Plus we were a pretty popular project among classmates... given that our project meant that we had several kegs stashed away in a fridge that we had a key to access and a supply of plastic cups.

I can imagine and now I'm beginning to see the downside of my university not having an engineering program :P

Our engineering campus was literally isolated from the rest of the school; besides architecture students. It's a campus that's like a 10 minute walk away from the main campus; because they didn't have engineering until they took over the old government founded "technical university". So sadly you likely would have still been screwed out of free beer.

since we don't usually live "on campus" here, it's likely the beer would've found its way to a party or two I'd have known about regardless ;)

True enough. Plus on a Friday afternoon the campus was still very much open while people didn't have a lot of classes, so it wouldn't have been hard to make the walk over and manage to find your way to the fridge. Also Friday was "Engibeering" so being a little buzzed on campus did not suggest that you had been drinking in a lab.

I was trying to come up with a beer + engineering portmanteau and all I got was "beergineering" but I see you already have that covered :D

Presumably that was one of the first things to do when founding the school.

always good to have the right prorities

Literally one of the first activities we did on our first day was go from the main university campus to the engineering one while chanting a song they gave us the lyrics to. The chorus was "We are, we are, we are, we are, the engineers. We can, we can, we can, we can, demolish 40 beers. Drink rum, drink rum, drink rum, drink rum, and come along with us. Cause we don't give a damn about any old man who don't give a damn about us." I can't believe I remember that.

I feel like it was pretty iffy to get us to chant that 10 years ago, and it might not fly anymore.

that's both inappropriate and amazing :P