« first day (980 days earlier)      last day (2860 days later) » 

12:01 AM
I have only tried learning a couple numerical methods, though I'll have a course on it sometime soon
it may not have the most cutting-edge version of any one technique, but it is 1000+ pages of saying where people screwed up in the past
In this month I have been told that around 50 books are must-haves :P
@ChrisWhite wow
Isn't that what physics is all about? Years upon years of screwing up.
as an added bonus, they implement all the algorithms they discuss - in C++ :P:P
(actually I rarely read the code itself - the text is better)
12:05 AM
well, physics tended to actually work to some degree along the way
@ChrisWhite pointy things?
@ChrisWhite Yeah, of course. But my first impression of the history of physics was screwup upon screwup foretelling screwups yet to come :P
Of course, now I understand it all better -- not exactly screwups
speaking of numerical methods - there exists a Mathoverflow question I know the answer to!
Q: What is a good method to find random points on the n-sphere when n is large?

Dick PalaisAs part of a more complex algorithm, I need a fast method to find random points of the n-sphere, $S^n$, starting with a RNG (random number generator). A simple way to do this (in low dimensions at least) is to select a random point of the (n+1)-ball and normalize it. And to get a random point of ...

12:15 AM
their standards must be slipping
@ChrisWhite: Given how many random number generators from the old days were horribly flawed -- e.g., tended to output points on hyperplanes instead of uniformly-- it's a miracle that any of their computations came out rigth.
@user1504 indeed - the same holds for all the unstable integration schemes they had going
12:33 AM
BTW, if you ever want to read full-on angry rantings about numerical idiocies, check out Bill Kahan's website, especially cs.berkeley.edu/~wkahan/Curmudge.pdf
@ManishEarth should see page 6 of that rant ;)
12:56 AM
@DavidZaslavsky Duh... Leave it... I deleted it. (Have to think of some other thing) ;-)
@CrazyBuddy why?
1:23 AM
@ManishEarth Regarding the community promotion ads... As they haven't replied us yet, I've deleted it (only from my PC) --> I still have it in the image hosting site :P
I can grab & edit it whenever if I want :D
1:42 AM
Strange comment I've ever seen..! It would've been ridiculous if older reasons were still there :D
This question appears to be off-topic because it is too localized — Dilaton 15 hours ago
Haha... OT & TL at the same time..! And, OT because it's TL ;-)
More strange...
Why's does the trolley car reason not say what Chris said...
Or, Is it the way it is,,, and I'm sleepy :D
2:45 AM
@ChrisWhite is it true that you're not allowed to use any of the algorithms in the Numerical recipes book? Maybe some of the reviewers at Amazon.com are over reacting.
2:57 AM
@CrazyBuddy actually I did get a reply a little later. They're fine with it and even gave me a link to a hi-res logo.
@LarryHarson hmm, it is a restricted license - basically, up to 10 routines can be copied for entirely personal use
but you cannot copyright an algorithm, just source code
@LarryHarson Of course not - if it were, there would be no point in publishing the book at all. You're not allowed to redistribute the implementations they provide, though. So if you use the NR code in a program, you can't share that code with others. You can only share the code you wrote, and then anyone who wants to compile the program has to get their own independent copy of the NR code.
I don't use any of the source code anyway (the C++-isms are overkill IMO, plus all their code relies on their own defined classes, so the routines are not particularly modular as written)
Yeah, me neither. I usually use GSL
Also the NR code is badly written, with cryptic variable names all over the place
3:03 AM
yeah - they basically just took their fortran code from the first edition and did the minimum necessary to translate it to C++
That explains it
and since F77 doesn't allow long variable names or more than ~70 characters on a line...
3:29 AM
More tag wiki edits submitted...
3:51 AM
More tag wiki edits (partially) approved...
I have to jump in before the mods approve them if I'm to have any chance for a Reviewer badge ;)
4:06 AM
@crazy ah, I see. If it's a copyright issue for having the post on meta, however, they'll file a dmca takedown request. Not entirely necessary to delete, but ok.
Note that a DMCA takedown is quite different from a @dmckee takedown, the latter involves flying neutrino cupcakes
@crazy trolley car closes show up as an exta temporary option in the close menu, but are in the end just a comment with upvotes. Finally the post is closed as off topic
Re: "OT because it is TL" that's fine, though I would prefer if a closing comment didn't explain one bit of jargon in terms of another :P It should be as clear as possible.
4:58 AM
@ManishEarth If you stand back far enough some of them will oscillate into brownies before they reach you. It's a hot field in experimental baking.
5:54 AM
@dmckee I wonder what the prospects would be for a brownie factory....
4 hours later…
9:39 AM
@DavidZaslavsky Yeah... Anyway I can get that? :D
@ManishEarth Err... That's why David was appointed to ask them their permission ;-)
7 hours ago, by David Zaslavsky
@CrazyBuddy actually I did get a reply a little later. They're fine with it and even gave me a link to a hi-res logo.
@ManishEarth I know that... What I require an explanation is about the reason that it's closed...
I mean, have a look at the image again/....
> This question does not appear to be on-topic, etc.., etc,.. - QMechanic, Manishearth
What the heck is that? ;-)
10:32 AM
@crazy I know...
Yeah, that's because QMechanic and I are off topic :p
@ManishEarth BTW, You might be enjoying..! (1 sec)
More seriously: That lists everyone who vtcd for it
People are believing me (even now) after posting my apologies that it's a FAKE..!
Thats due to the way the news feed works
@ManishEarth Hey... I didn't post it publicly (because you, twistor, etc.) already knew abt it (and you've already posted it) ;-)
That's why I posted in both of my groups..!
(which had almost many friends from my colg.) - I'm not greedy... It was enough for me :P
2 hours later…
12:32 PM
@CrazyBuddy t.co/PNxwW9JpaO
@DavidZaslavsky Cool... It is really a larger version ;-)
Q: Potential Difference vs. Capacitance

BobWhen the potential difference is large the capacitor system is storing more energy than when it is small. Where does the additional energy "come from" as the plate spacing increases?

Is this really off topic? It's a comceptual question, though they've missed the "show some effort" . Not really homeworky to me, just simple.
@qmechanic ^
@ManishEarth: Yeah.. Not a homework (actually, I think I saw that question on that day), but it isn't that much clear..!
Ill edit and reopen
Just two sentences can be confusing...
@ManishEarth Yeah, go on ;-)
12:42 PM
Yeah.. I left a comment just a sec before you edited it ;-)
Reopened, @qmechanic feel free to close if you disagree , don't wait for my opinion on it :)
1:04 PM
@ManishEarth : Nah, either way. It is a bit clearer now.
1:18 PM
With me, Mark becomes a 20k user :D
1 hour later…
2:33 PM
@ManishEarth: The math paper is really a bless and a curse...
I was happy trolling people for almost 12 hrs..
(till they actually believed me)
Now, this spreads throughout the college faster than an epidemic...
3:21 PM
3 hours later…
6:06 PM
The last message was posted 3 hours ago. now
3 hours later…
8:39 PM
@ChrisWhite Do you have an opinion on the tag ? Should it refer to questions about all bodies in orbit around another except a star or should it only refer to Earth's Moon and a new tag, should be used for non-Earth moons?
@tpg2114 it is certainly being used for both
i feel like there's no harm in leaving it as-is - after all, it's not like there are many questions about our particular moon that can't at some level apply to other planet-moon systems as well
Right, it would be a retagging effort
Okay, no problem. Just wanted to check how particular your community is about terminology :)
along the same lines, last I checked we have , but not or any other planet
seems a bit inconsistent...
8:50 PM
Maybe we should just synonymize ->
maybe manually add in to those questions before that though
Or -> which would be a new tag but would cover extra-solar planets as well as the outer planets
true - would overlap with a bit, but I don't think that's an issue; the former would probably be more about general physical characteristics, the latter about search methods and planet-formation as a whole
hmmm, on that note, why is not plural?
8:54 PM
Aren't rocky planets also ?
yes - so that's why I think it's okay to have both that tag and
Or do we just use for talking about planets in general and is about the search?
that would be acceptable
@tpg2114 btw, I was approving your tag wiki edits, but then I was told I had approved too many today and that I had to stop :P
Heh, I think I'm close to the badge
There's a bunch more pending
8:57 PM
maybe the Stackexchange AI is trying to prevent them from being approved
Do they just go into a review queue too? So you can only do 20 a day?
yeah - same queue for questions, answers, and tag wikis
Poor people, I've been flooding suggested edits
I knocked out a lot of the low-hanging fruit excerpts though
at some point I got that number, which is just the pending edit review queue
9:00 PM
yet I can't do anything about it, despite its urgent appearance
I think I had 20 more before I could get the badge... I wasn't counting so I don't know what I'm at
Turns out 50 is a lot
i'd be interested in seeing how many various people have, but I can't figure out what all the data.SE fields are called
in particular, I don't know how to look up tag wiki statistics
What kind of statistics?
Q: Database schema documentation for the public data dump and Data Explorer

Stu ThompsonThe data dumps are currently released once a month. Over time as new features are introduced to Stack Exchange sites and other bits of data added, the 'anatomy' of the data dump is likely to change. What is the current structure of the public data dump? A copy of the data dump can be obtained fr...

It looks like you would pull all the ExcerptID's from the Tag table
Then pull all the authors and sites from the Posts table where the ID was the ExcerptID (or the WikiID if you so chose, or both)
I guess you don't need to pull the site, the query is site specific
So just the authorID
ahh, that would help - maybe i'll get around to it later
9:07 PM
Then count the number of times the authorID appears
Actually, it's even easier. Just pull straight from posts where PostTypeID is 4 or 5
Wait wait! Pull from the badges table the number of people who have the badge :)
ummm, no one has the badge on this site... physics.stackexchange.com/help/badges/87/research-assistant
I know...
Gotta get it
Seems more likely to be the first to get than
I think I've done 46...
9:49 PM
Does the rear wheel of a motorcycle function as a lift-vortex during a wheelie? What kind of nonsense is that?

« first day (980 days earlier)      last day (2860 days later) »