The h Bar

ACuriousMind

00:05

@SillyGoose You need to play through the counterfactual here if you don't understand what the text means: If the core electrons did participate in conduction, what orders of magnitude would you expect between the conductivity of those elements?

Silly Goose

@ACuriousMind I will attempt this computation after i finish the section :)

ACuriousMind

@SillyGoose I didn't mean some fancy "computation" :P Just observe that Caesium has 20 times the atomic number of Lithium, but there's only a factor of two between their conductivities. What the text means is simply that the conductivities do not increase proportionally to the atomic number, so it's a good guess that there's not drastically more conduction electrons when the atomic number increases

Silly Goose

hm but even in this table one out of six metals has anomalous behavior--isn't this also a cause for concern?

I am referring to the fact that the resistivity drops when going from lithium to sodium

ACuriousMind

the observation you're supposed to make is that the resistivities are all within the same order of magnitude

I'm not sure why you'd label the drop as "anomalous", that it can drop supports the text even more - you would expect a much larger increase at each step if the resistivity increased with rising atomic number because more than the valence electrons participated in conduction

Silly Goose

well i think i would not take the data shown by this table as suggesting independence of resistivity on atomic number

i would agree that it suggests there is not a strong dependent on atomic number

ACuriousMind

00:20

@SillyGoose I think you're looking at this the wrong way around: You're not supposed to look at the table and go "wow, resistivity is independent of atomic number!". You're supposed to take the assumption that it is, look at the table and go "yup, no obvious contradiction there".

Silly Goose

02:00

Why is scattering assumed in classical Drude model? The Maxwell speed distribution directly follows from assuming that the free electron gas obeys the classical canonical ensemble (which need not assume scattering? I am not sure), which leads to the wanted specific heat capacity result.

Or maybe this just says that scattering is not necessary to explain the specific heat capacity given by the Drude model

Okay sorry ignore my question

(1) Canonical ensemble $\implies$ heat capacity result; (2) Canonical ensemble + scattering $\implies$ conductivity results

Sir Cumference

04:29

Wow, the new Sonic movie was actually a top notch adaptation of one of my childhood favorite games

User1865345

0

Q: Regarding recent infestation of new users resorting to gen AI targeting STEM communities

Of late, there has been a surge of new users who venture to various communities and answer at a pretty staggering rate with apparently good looking posts, majority of which would be long and heavy with mathjax formatted equations. The initial targets were: Cross Validated, Mathematics, Maths Over...

discussion

Made a post at Meta. Feel free to edit or add anything, if needed.

think_meaning_buildß

+1

👍

User1865345

As usual, some user is saying flag and move on. At least read the post completely 🙂

I know now and then there will be some users who would use gen ai. But this is a coordinated surge by similar behaving users. I am reporting this incident.

naturallyInconsistent

04:45

+1

User1865345

👍🏻

What I wish is if one community bans the user in question, there should be some mechanism where that community's mods alert the others where the user is active.

That would make the detection easier.

For example, many of these users have banned at MO for months. Yet they are doing the same thing freely at other communities waiting to be recognized and flagged.

However, as I credited you folks there, let me 👏🏻 for you folks again to look into these nonsense and flag those.

Appreciate that.

As for mewoth, @naturallyInconsistent, I was already late and it was pretty hectic day for me and I even forgot the keys. Lol. I didn't even see the emails where two students said they would be writing a term paper. I had to hastily arrange that. 🙂

I would be going back after holidays again.

Allie

05:11

hi bestie

User1865345

Hello, Allie.

Allie

my head hurts bad

naturallyInconsistent

m i a o ~ m i a o ~ a l l ~

User1865345

Why!

naturallyInconsistent

why??!!

Allie

05:15

meow

i dont know. possibly medication?

possibly anxiety

i dunno

User1865345

Hmm.

@Allie you need meditation.

Allie

yah ive been trying

User1865345

Darken the room. Light a candle. Stare at it.

Allie

its pretty hard a lot of times it straight up does not work. depending on where my head is at

and believe me i try very hard

User1865345

Think about your favorite things.

Allie

05:18

its a little harder than that for me

naturallyInconsistent

could it be tension headache? Miao miao realised that a LOT of people have it; miao miao included, and massage to relax the shoulder and neck muscles have drastically improved quality of life.

Allie

dont worry, i got it

@naturallyInconsistent probably, i have EXTREMELY bad tension

User1865345

@naturallyInconsistent hmm

naturallyInconsistent

But if it is anxiety, then maybe you will need psych help. They can definite do a lot.

Allie

i already do get said help

hence the medication

it is a slow process

naturallyInconsistent

05:19

yay

User1865345

Good

Allie

i will tell myself today. i am capable

of doing this quantum chemistry

naturallyInconsistent

yay~

oh

Allie

and surviving

naturallyInconsistent

but you definitely can do it

Allie

05:20

(what imminent fear is there? no idea)

naturallyInconsistent

allie has a headache. problem, be slain

User1865345

@Allie you need a pet.

Allie

I have 2 cats

my dog actually died today.

User1865345

🐱🐱🐱

naturallyInconsistent

oh nooo

Allie

05:21

meow

User1865345

@Allie what??? Hmmm

Soo sad. Heaven got another angel.

Allie

woof in peace

User1865345

Please don't feel so bad. It's good to cry. But have a moment enjoying the happy memories.

Mine died when I was away preparing my masters dissertation. I came to know months later.

Allie

oh my

i guess family didnt let you know since they knew you were stressed?

User1865345

Yes.

Initially I was really angry. I mean how could they?

But then I understood their perspective. Still I was depressed for days. Spent late night in uni and going back only when the department had to be closed.

naturallyInconsistent

05:31

was just listening to youtuber explaining why Mozart's music was so good, and one part, he referenced the fact that a sad piece of music that Mozart made, was made when his mother died and he had to hide and postpone the news of her death so that his father would have time to prepare. That one night, he wrote a letter to his father saying that she was badly ill, but another letter to his friend to console his father because his mom actually died. Doggos are family, deserving of hiding death

User1865345

Wow

In fact I dedicated my dissertation to my doggo.

Thanks to my guide who approved it.

Anyway Allie. Don't be sad so much. Attend your other two cats. Sometimes if one pet dies, they could impact the others. Check for any such signs.

qwerty

06:58

sometimes it's good to have a break. i've been feeling mildly burnt out lately. i had a long walk at the beach :)

Slereah

07:54

Apparently all infinitesimal spaces have entirely boring lattices

Literally nothing spatially to differentiate them from a point

Only their spaces of probes differ

at least within the context of topos theory

No non-trivial subregions for infinitesimal points

Non-standard analysis does have it but it doesn't admit any obvious parallels to formal synthetic geometry

Nilpotent elements seem to basically contribute zilch

Herr Feinmann

08:40

@Slereah intuitively it makes a lot of sense

naturallyInconsistent

@qwerty walk, walk~

Allie

hi besties

guess what

im going to start reading Ashcroft

i did NOT expect to get this into physics but it just happened naturally

so excited for all the books i have to read

i want to know WHAT THE HELL A PHONON IS

Slereah

08:59

@HerrFeinmann I'm not sure it does :p

It works though I don't think it's intuitive

Like it's a very algebraic way to do it

John Rennie

@Allie Do you know what the normal modes of an oscillation are?

Allie

yes

its that for electrons in a crystal?

Slereah

Things get extra bad for stupider spaces like supersymmetric spaces

which I'm not sure if they have any good interpretation

User1865345

@Slereah sounds cool though.

Allie

meow

Slereah

09:02

Well it only does because physicists just add the word "super" everywhere

User1865345

@Allie hm. So physics have got all the cool names. I see.

@Slereah lol

Allie

im in a good mood

this is not normal....

User1865345

@Allie medication working

Allie

i was just gonna say it must be the chemicals modulating my brain activity...

User1865345

Hello @JohnRennie (only you were the one I didn't interact here)

Allie

09:03

because usually my brain says "everything bad you should be sad and nothing matters"

Slereah

Apparently in the topos way a supersymmetric space is basically just a slightly different version of a space with infinitesimals, but only in the sense that it's a non-trivial space with only a point???

User1865345

@Allie brain is a trickster.

John Rennie

@Allie In a crystal you have many atoms all vibrating as if they are all connected with tiny springs. In principle we can analyse the normal modes for this oscillating system. In practice there are 10^(large number) of these modes, but in principle it could be done.

Allie

but right now.... i am just excited to learn and read

User1865345

@Allie great!!

@qwerty 👍🏻👍🏻

John Rennie

09:04

@Allie And each of those modes is a phonon.

Allie

@JohnRennie i see

I will still be reading this book to get the full picture :)

User1865345

@Slereah you read Goldblatt's book on Topoi?

Slereah

I did not

I'm not sure I'll ever really get supersymmetry outside of "it no commute"

User1865345

I see

Anyway whenever you are done with this @Slereah, may I suggest you do probability?

Slereah

Hell no

John Rennie

09:08

@Allie They behave like particles because they scatter off each other i.e. one mode can exchange energy with another mode.

Slereah

I'm no big fan of stats :p

User1865345

plotting to convert one physicist to statistician

@Slereah never say never.

You will be loving Kolmogorov. He was a cool guy.

John Rennie

This is like the a phonon being annihilated as the energy of its mode decreases, and a new phonon being created as the energy of the new mode increases.

Slereah

@User1865345 Didn't, I just said hell nah :p

Allie

thank you bestie i am excited to learn about this

althought tbh my brain is pretty fried rn its 4 am

Slereah

09:10

@User1865345 most evil thing

User1865345

I advice every newbie to begin with Kolmogorov's landmark Grundbegriffe der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung.

Allie

but that makes sense how it acts like a particle

i was always confused by that

User1865345

@Slereah you need exorcism. I will show you the beauty of probability world. It's magical.

It's ruled by law of large numbers. What a beauty.

Allie

lol

User1865345

Monkeys can write Shakespeare owing to this.

Allie

09:11

meow

they can also write my entire chat history

...

User1865345

Law of Large Numbers is like God card. It can do anything.

Allie

can it buy me a new car

i didnt think so

User1865345

🙂

Allie

smile

User1865345

We are beyond materialistic possessions. We only deal with probability.

Allie

09:14

i joke

i will hopefully move to the city where i will never have to drive again next year

just pray I get into one of those phd programs!!!!

User1865345

@Allie although there were some nerd guys who apparently didn't like law of large numbers and revolted against it.

qwerty

@Slereah you've been posting lots about topos theory lately - what interests you about it, in relation to physics?

User1865345

in Ten fold, Oct 31 at 14:25, by User1865345

The paper: A numerical evaluation of the Finite Monkeys Theorem

The original version (from Gut's Probability text):

in Ten fold, Nov 1 at 13:02, by User1865345

Still no love for probability? 🤔

@Allie you will.

Have faith.

Slereah

@qwerty pretty much

also just generally an interesting notion

qwerty

pretty much...?

Allie

09:21

meow.

i will tell everyone here as soon as i get my first acceptance

naturallyInconsistent

09:33

M E O W ~

qwerty

@Slereah I mean what's the connection to physics?

Slereah

@qwerty It's a generic setting for mathematics, much like set theory

You can basically deal with any type of theory in them

But you can also choose specifically some type of properties you find important in there

So it can make some rather complex statements very compactly

qwerty

oh cool

@Slereah are there particularly well known examples of this?

User1865345

Perhaps this? `What is a Thing?': Topos Theory in the Foundations of Physics

@Allie 👏🏻👏🏻

Slereah

@qwerty mostly fairly abstruse statements about gauge theory :p

qwerty

09:38

xD

@User1865345 oh thanks. @Slereah have you read/seen this paper too?

Slereah

Yeah

Unfortunately all the most important part of topos theory for physics involved $\infty$-topos which are extra shitty to deal with

qwerty

10:03

interesting that a mathematical physics paper makes so much reference to philosophy

Slereah

it's a popular thing to do in that sort of domain :p

qwerty

interesting. on an unrelated note @Slereah I saw your comment from earlier about all Bayesians being losers or libertarians :p I know what you mean but it's not exactly true, as there are some disciplines which use Bayesian stats more than others

Slereah

I know, I'm just being a bit silly

Just groups who have turned some scientific idea into a trend

Not the first time this happened

User1865345

cough

Clinical trials and epidemiology are all Bayesian. If you survived covid, leave a note of appreciation for Bayesians.

Slereah

I know

I mean more

lesswrong.com

Those types

qwerty

10:18

yeah me and pm 2ring brought it up the other day chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/66847191#66847191

thanks rationalist bros /s

User1865345

Just a fact: Bayes himself is not too much responsible for what we know as Bayesian statistics.

Dude is enjoying in his grave all the credit in his name.

It was actually Sir Harold Jeffreys who popularized objective Bayes, the thing we use.

And surprise....

Sir Harold Jeffreys was a physicist.

qwerty

ahh we should give Jeffreys the prior credit

2

B)

User1865345

🤣

Right

Btw this is not a one off example. There were many statisticians of the golden age who were initially physicists.

So Physicists love probability. 🥱

qwerty

it makes sense. a lot of fields of physics only really make sense if you're strong in statistics

User1865345

No idea but I loved what you said.

My primitive memory reminds of Maxwell distribution curve.

Slereah

10:32

Bayes was more about divine providence than statistics

User1865345

That is true.

Dude wasn't thinking about statistics.

It is only after de Finetti formalized the existence of priors based on conditional independence and exchangeability.

The paradigm should be named after them, not Bayes. He has got undue credits.

Saw that in Wikipedia:

> De Finetti held different social and political beliefs through his life: following fascism during his youth, then moving to Christian socialism and finally adhering to the Radical Party.

Some radical changes indeed.

naturallyInconsistent

10:58

there are too many things named wrongly

it aint an egregious case, like stolen credits

User1865345

True. Bayes should be given credit for developing a rather special case of what is today's Bayes' theorem. But he was nowhere near any form of interpretation of the same.

I think it was actually Laplace who did the heavy lifting.

Finally people like I mentioned above formalized the subjectivity.

naturallyInconsistent

there are many such instances elsewhere too. Generalisations of a theorem tends to still take on the name of the original

User1865345

I see.

Slereah

Stigler's law of eponymy

Stigler's law of eponymy, proposed by University of Chicago statistics professor Stephen Stigler in his 1980 publication "Stigler's law of eponymy", states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. Examples include Hubble's law, which was derived by Georges Lemaître two years before Edwin Hubble; the Pythagorean theorem, which was known to Babylonian mathematicians before Pythagoras; and Halley's Comet, which was observed by astronomers since at least 240 BC (although its official designation is due to the first ever mathematical prediction of such astronomical phenomenon...

2

User1865345

Even this was also not named after the original guy. Lol.

BTW Stigler is a renowned statistics historian.

His PhD work was some hard core asymptotic results. But later he turned to history.

qwerty

11:14

on a reverse(?) tangent. that paper on topos theory is really interesting, as it's poking at something I've mentioned before on chat. about how we only measure real numbers; but actually even that is not strict enough.

DIRAC1930

What's everyones favourite era of physics?

Slereah

We typically only count things or look at intersections for the most part

@DIRAC1930 paleolithic

qwerty

yup

User1865345

@DIRAC1930 when Maxwell developed his equations.

Don't ask me why. I watched a video of a girl who said that.

Probably she was talking about Feynman; I didn't complete it.

Slereah

@User1865345 Kathy?

DIRAC1930

11:22

Maxwells, Diracs, Schrodingers and Einsteins equations are the only ones I care about

User1865345

Wait. Let me watch my history. I didn't remember the name.

the sham legacy of Richard Feynman

►

qwerty

@Slereah the Mesolithic was more fun

User1865345

I really don't care because I can't assess her opinions. I still don't know why these physics vids come to my feed, although I do occasionally click.

Slereah

Paleolithic had many great physicists rly

Ug

Grugg

User1865345

Hey @qwerty, also found this thread while googling.

Slereah

11:24

Throg

User1865345

9

Q: In the topos-theoretic interpretation of Physics by Isham & Doering what role does intuitionistic logic play?

Isham & Doering have written a series of papers exploring how to ground physics in topoi. Now the internal logic of topoi is higher order typed intuitionistic logic. In their theory what role is played by intuitionistic logic? What are the types in their theory? I've also asked this question on ...

quantum-mechanics quantum-field-theory mathematical-physics foundations

Maybe you find that relevant.

DIRAC1930

Her videos are too long

qwerty

@Slereah remind me about Ug's law and his rival Grugg

Slereah

Early GR model

"thing fall down"

qwerty

no surely that was Throg

DIRAC1930

11:26

Does anyone have any information about Schrodingers beliefs regarding quantum field theory

Slereah

> If you push something hard enough, it will fall over — Fudd's First Law of Opposition.

User1865345

Legit law.

Leaky Nun

11:47

if the field is continuous how can the energy transfer be discrete??

Slereah

which field and what energy transfer

Leaky Nun

EM field and photons

Herr Feinmann

Well, first you could explain what you mean with continuous field :P

Leaky Nun

every point in space has a value

even if you keep zooming in

Slereah

Same way that non-relativistic QM works even though position is continuous

Your wavefunctions aren't "sharp" configurations of the EM field

Leaky Nun

11:56

i.e. it just works?

Slereah

it's a probability distribution over the space of all EM fields

There's no fundamental contradiction here

Leaky Nun

so if we keep tuning down the energy eventually the EM field is not continuous anymore?

Slereah

What do you mean by not continuous exactly

Leaky Nun

the real EM field, not the probability distribution

Slereah

like what situation do you have in mind where that's an issue

Leaky Nun

11:59

let's say i have a single photon, which we know is a wave in the EM field, so it distributes across space, and then its energy is transferred to a point; where did the energy in the other points of space go?

Slereah

Well, first issue : there are no single photon states

naturallyInconsistent

what do you mean by "and then its energy is transferred to a point"?

Leaky Nun

an electron absorbed the energy of the photon

electron is the point

Slereah

And typically in experiments where we have a "photon", we don't have a photon (eigenstate of the number operator), we have some wavepacket

Leaky Nun

hmm that's a good point

so it's never a single photon?

because a single photon would continue through the entirety of space and time?

Slereah

12:03

Single photons aren't actually states

Leaky Nun

like even "behind the laser beam"

Slereah

They're not normalizable

Leaky Nun

yeah

naturallyInconsistent

@LeakyNun are electrons points?

Leaky Nun

i guess all the scipop videos that say "photon" is wrong then

Slereah

12:03

Also like typically in QFT settings, we look at asymptotic states, so we don't really see the "real" process

We don't see the unitary evolution of the EM wavefunction

As it is not tractable

Leaky Nun

@naturallyInconsistent depends on the, uh, "Copenhagen interpretation"

Slereah

QFT is still a quantum theory, given some time parameter your wavefunction evolves continuously as $\psi(t)$

And the "real field" is gonna be measurements you can do on that wavefunctions

which would be continuous as a result

But nobody does it because it's not a solvable problem so far

naturallyInconsistent

@LeakyNun it is good that you understand that it depends

Leaky Nun

can free electrons (not bound to an atom) receive a photon?

Slereah

Sure

Leaky Nun

12:06

@Slereah so if "single photons" don't exist, how did the absorption lines form?

Slereah

Although with the caveat of what I said, in QFT you don't really have "individual electrons" receiving "individual photons"

That's an approximation we do

naturallyInconsistent

@LeakyNun you should check that the bare interaction is forbidden.

by failure to conserve energy-momentum

Leaky Nun

what do you mean?

naturallyInconsistent

It is a standard example problem that professors would set students to do

Leaky Nun

but Slereah said "Sure" to that

ok i want to understand this from another angle

let's say i shoot two electrons towards each other

and then they are deflected and they travel an approximately hyperbolic path

naturallyInconsistent

12:10

@LeakyNun that's the thing, you cannot prove that the path is approximately hyperbolic

Leaky Nun

would i be correct to say that one electron actually transfered "one photon" to the other, and then the "photon" is actually the energy difference between the two electrons across the whole time (so it doesn't have say one frequency and one energy across time)?

@naturallyInconsistent uh... this is messing with my brain lol

do we just not have this problem in the classical setting because there are a lot of electrons?

naturallyInconsistent

@LeakyNun Slereah definitely knows that a universe with only just one free electron in a vacuum and a photon, then the conservation of energy and momentum leads to triviality. The issue is that there are many other scenarios.

@LeakyNun once you step into quantum realm, things are horrible like that.

(anyway, gtg, sorry)

Leaky Nun

@naturallyInconsistent as in, say i have two electrons A --- B, and then at time t=0, A moves leftwards and emits a photon rightwards, and then at time t=1, B receives the photon and moves rightwards, and then i can prove that energy and momentum are not conserved?

wait even the first step is problematic

i've created energy out of nothing

A was stationary, but then A and the photon both gained energy

i would have to assume that A was moving rightward at the beginning

(and then transfer to A's reference frame and derive the same contradiction)

ACuriousMind

@LeakyNun A free travelling electron cannot emit a photon

Leaky Nun

that is mind boggling

ACuriousMind

12:17

What is the problem you actually want to solve here?

you've said a lot of rather confused things that are a wild mixture of a classical, QM and QFT picture and the reason it doesn't make sense to you is because it doesn't - you're mixing wildly incommensurable viewpoints with each other

Leaky Nun

i mean i don't know what naturally meant by the scenario that would violate energy and momentum

ACuriousMind

You cannot have the scenario that a free electron absorbs (or emits) a photon and conserve both energy and momentum

that's why that kind of absorption/emission can't happen

it's a relatively straightforward exercise, you just write down the conservation equations and derive a contradiction

Leaky Nun

5 mins ago, by Leaky Nun

(and then transfer to A's reference frame and derive the same contradiction)

is it the same as what i did here?

ACuriousMind

not really, reference frames aren't really relevant here

Leaky Nun

as in, it was more of a shortcut

ACuriousMind

12:24

but yes, the contradiction is probably most obvious in the rest frame of the electron that is supposed to emit something

Leaky Nun

yeah

@ACuriousMind could i solve this problem by declaring that E=hf and p=h/λ are wrong because it wouldn't be one photon with one definite energy?

@ACuriousMind yeah i think i'm still digesting the idea that if you zoom in far enough things don't have definite paths

ACuriousMind

Solve which problem? That free electrons can't absorb/emit photons isn't a problem, that's perfectly in sync with the reality we observe

Leaky Nun

because i've seen too many drawings of single electrons

@ACuriousMind no, but electrons repel each other right?

ACuriousMind

@LeakyNun Yes. What does that have to do with photons?

Leaky Nun

any force transfer is a photon right

ACuriousMind

12:30

nope

well, not a real photon

many people insist on talking about "virtual" photons, but as the name says, they're not real

I explain the formal derivation of the Coulomb force from the QFT scattering here

Leaky Nun

if they're not real how did they repel each other

ACuriousMind

I don't know what that question means

Leaky Nun

well electron A lost energy and electron B gained energy

they did so via the EM field

the EM field carried the energy

ACuriousMind

What does "via" mean?

Leaky Nun

A delivered the energy to the EM field and then the EM field delivered the energy to B

ACuriousMind

12:33

What does "it carried the energy" mean?

Leaky Nun

like a mailman delivering a letter!

ACuriousMind

@LeakyNun I would suggest that there is absolutely nothing in the physical formalism that supports this story, as nice as it may be.

Leaky Nun

well how do EM waves exist without a medium then

ACuriousMind

what do EM waves have to do with electrons repelling?

Leaky Nun

they both use the EM field

ACuriousMind

12:34

So?

I'm not saying the EM field cannot carry energy

I'm saying trying to describe the interaction of two electrons in terms of them shooting packets of energy via the EM field at each other is doomed to fail if you poke at it hard enough

Leaky Nun

hmm

how do they interact then

Herr Feinmann

12:54

@Slereah I was thinking that a discrete lattice is spanned by a (set of) discrete (finite) displacement vector(s) and an origin. If you imagine to apply this to the infinitesimal case, you have you origin but the infinitesimal displacement (or better arbitrary displacement) still map you to the same point. Not that I know anything about this. I'm doing heavy handwaving

Slereah

@HerrFeinmann Wrong interpretation of the word "lattice" here

Lattice (order)

A lattice is an abstract structure studied in the mathematical subdisciplines of order theory and abstract algebra. It consists of a partially ordered set in which every pair of elements has a unique supremum (also called a least upper bound or join) and a unique infimum (also called a greatest lower bound or meet). An example is given by the power set of a set, partially ordered by inclusion, for which the supremum is the union and the infimum is the intersection. Another example is given by the natural numbers, partially ordered by divisibility, for which the supremum is the least common multiple...

ACuriousMind

@LeakyNun Magic.

Leaky Nun

i see, so a sufficiently advanced technology

ACuriousMind

That's only a slight exaggeration, there just is no good story for what the interacting time evolution actually does (essentially the only story we've come up with are those of the virtual particles but it has many problems). I rant about this e.g. in this answer

Transcript for