« first day (1965 days earlier)      last day (2970 days later) » 

4:00 PM
I was mistaken then
 
vzn
Mar 11 at 19:57, by 0celo7
I am a bit of a nihilist
 
@vzn which bit? The butt?
 
@vzn whatever, it's meaningless
 
vzn
@JohnRennie the butt... of the joke?
@0celo7 lol exactly
> Nihilism (/ˈnaɪ.ᵻlɪzəm/ or /ˈniː.ᵻlɪzəm/; from the Latin nihil, nothing) is a philosophical doctrine that suggests the lack of belief in one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life. [wikipedia]
 
"Questions about the notations in Weinberg"...not clicking that question. Nothing good can lie behind that.
 
4:03 PM
Huh?
@ACuriousMind link please.
 
@0celo7 Look at the site you lazy bum.
 
On mobile!!!
And in a lecture!!!
 
Not my problem.
Not my problem either.
 
ahh, just forget it you guys
We have a chat session to start
 
Ok, time for GR
 
4:04 PM
Who else has something to talk about?
 
no one, so let's do GR.
 
Also, is anyone here new to the site or in their first chat session?
 
Yes, I'm new.
Can we do GR here?
 
yeah, I am.
 
@DavidZ Hm, since you (reasonably) want to keep the HW discussion till you have that meta post ready, I don't think there are unresolved meta issues.
 
4:05 PM
@0celo7 not for 5 minutes
 
Not new to the site, but first chat session
 
@AnuroopKuppam welcome!
@ACuriousMind makes sense to me
 
thanks
 
Not that there's any more to it than that, but I figure welcoming new people might as well be done here
lol. I'm not making much sense.
 
I am not sure what this chatroom is about
 
4:07 PM
@AnuroopKuppam That's fine, we're not sure either most of the time ;)
 
The chat room is not really about anything in particular.
These biweekly chat sessions are not necessarily about anything in particular either, but we do try to get as many people as possible together in the room at one time.
It's a good opportunity to bring up questions about how the site works or anything you want to get a broad spectrum of feedback on.
Speaking of getting broad feedback, I'm thinking of having a rudimentary schedule for chat sessions in the future. Like setting aside 5 minutes to welcome newcomers and answer questions about the site (for example).
Thoughts?
 
ohh ok! I thought it is a general chat room where people discuss physics. But now I know.
 
How does snapchat know what emoji to put next to people's names?
 
@AnuroopKuppam Well, most of the time (not during chat sessions) it is.
 
vzn
@AnuroopKuppam nice blog. are you undergraduate? are you reading nielsen & chuang for a class?
 
4:10 PM
@vzn I just finished my undergrad in CS in 2015. I want to study Quantum Computation for my grad.
 
vzn
@DavidZ this is one of the busiest chat rooms (on SE). its possible there are enough regulars for 2 rooms now...
 
@DavidZ Good idea, if coupled with a new meta advertisement for it, I'd say. Currently people only stumble across this by accident, I think
 
@ACuriousMind Yeah. Actually that's a good idea: put something in the community ad thread.
 
@vzn it is an attempt to improve my chances of getting into a grad program in Quantum Computation
 
vzn
4:11 PM
@AnuroopKuppam looking for a masters in CS or physics? have met some other indians in SE chat rooms who are getting into QM computation.
 
I also would like to have an event for it in the sidebar, but that has to be created manually every time. It becomes really repetitive.
 
^@DavidZ There is one
 
@ACuriousMind yeah, but that only shows up during the chat session itself. It doesn't do anything to give people advance warning.
 
It only shows up right before and during the chat session, though
 
I wonder why it's got the end time wrong. It's exactly half an hour out. Presumably somewhere there is a start time and/or duration set incorrectly.
 
4:14 PM
@vzn I want to get into a program like the one they have in UWaterloo, which combines both QM and CS.
 
vzn
@DavidZ community ads could work for a chat room announcement. just made one myself. anyone who like CS plz vote :)
 
@vzn I have taken both QM and QC courses in undergrad, that sparked my intrest
 
@JohnRennie caching
 
@JohnRennie Oh, the timer doesn't tick down unless you reload the site and I didn't reload it to take that picture.
 
4:16 PM
It actually is caching in this case: when I originally created the chat event, I did it for only half an hour, then later on we extended it to a full hour, but I guess that doesn't update the system that creates the listing in the community bulletin
Hi @Ezenhis
 
vzn
@AnuroopKuppam it would be cool if you could name them/ say something about them on your blog. & the books/ refs used etc.
@AnuroopKuppam think someone from UWaterloo hangs out in Computer Science trying to remember... oh... right...
 
@DanielSank claims to be a QC person
 
@0celo7: He is. I know where he works ;)
 
Sorry, I don't trust puppets.
 
@vzn I am in the process of migrating the blog from Wordpress to Ghost, which I personally think is infinitely better. It should be done in by the end of the month, and things will get less cluttered and more informative thereafter, I assure you
 
4:18 PM
I just wanted to make that restriction...
 
Hi. ;)
 
@DavidZ: I also only randomly stumble upon the chat session entries so it would be great to have an anouncement.
 
@Martin Let me bug the SE team about it and see if there's anything they can do to help get a recurring announcement going.
In the meantime, you can register for the event (if you haven't already) which will get you an email and a notification in your SE inbox for each chat session.
 
@DavidZ: sounds good. And I didn't really know I could register for the event. I should do that.
 
Registration doesn't do anything except sign you up for the notifications.
 
4:22 PM
@DavidZ: Thanks, I just wanted to ask!
 
@vzn solving every problem by hand and converting to latex is infact very time consuming, but ultimately worth the effort, I think, so I am trying to fit in as much as possible.
 
vzn
@AnuroopKuppam nice work! great ref! am a big fan of nielsen & have reviewed/ repeatedly cited his other book on network science on my blog... its not well known right now... =D
 
@Martin no problem :-)
@vzn I wanted to get back to that. You think we could/should split into two rooms?
How would we split?
(in terms of how to decide which messages go in one room and which in another)
I don't actually think the room is that busy outside of our regular chat sessions. It sees a lot less activity than the moderator chat room, or the Math chat room (I think), or several of the SO chat rooms. But actually the issue should be whether we have too much discussion here to fit in a single room, not how we stack up against other rooms.
 
vzn
@DavidZ the room seems really busy to me but maybe no one else thinks so. scanning thru several pages a day of history seems like a lot. it seems like SE rooms are either not very busy or very busy (extremes).
 
@vzn Thanks! people say its a bit outdated, especially the chapters on physical realization of qubits, its probably because Nielsen has moved to other things. He doesnt seem to be working on QC anymore.
 
4:28 PM
@vzn Yeah, I think you're right. Most rooms are dead, but those that do have a community to keep them alive get a lot of use because people want to talk.
 
I'm not sure I see the argument for a separate chat room. After all, temporary additional chat rooms can be created if there's a specific issue people want to discuss.
 
You won't evict me!
 
vzn
@DavidZ its just an idea. other ppl complain sometimes about too much chatter on other stuff eg video games etc. but maybe its unavoidable no matter how many rooms.
 
I'll chain myself to the foundation
GR lives matter!
 
It's a very valid issue to be thinking about, whether we should split the room. Some other sites do that. But I'm with @JohnRennie, I don't think the level of activity we have here really demands a split.
 
4:29 PM
@0celo7 No one even mentioned you. But that you think when people talk about "too much discussion" they mean you is telling.
 
vzn
@DavidZ agreed it would be a large paradigm shift maybe even somewhat alarming to some :P
 
@ACuriousMind Huh?
 
@vzn What would we even split into?
 
Yeah, well, you can't change anything without alarming some people. That's just life.
 
I was just referencing Danu wanting to get rid of me and @Slereah
 
4:30 PM
@ACuriousMind as in paranoia or egocentricity? :-)
 
I'm not paranoid.
 
@JohnRennie I could not possibly comment.
 
Paranoia is unjustified.
 
A pattern I've seen on some other sites is to create a separate "mods' office" or some such thing - a chat room dedicated to questions for the moderators, from non-mod members.
 
@0celo7 just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean we aren't all out to get you ...
 
4:31 PM
@JohnRennie Of course not
I'm sure some of you don't want to get me
Some.
 
We could definitely do that if people want it, but I don't think it would affect the traffic level here much.
 
@DavidZ I don't think people come here often enough to talk to mods to justify that
 
@DavidZ I suspect that would just end with the mods being continually hassled :-)
Speaking of which, is there a problem with you (the mods collectively) deleting an old answer of mine that is wrong but accepted?
 
vzn
@Martin are you a postdoc?
 
@JohnRennie lol, I dunno. I think people who want to hassle us will do so in chat or on meta or in comments or through whatever means they can find, and creating a chat room won't make much difference in that.
@JohnRennie we'd really rather not. Moderation powers aren't supposed to get involved in determining right vs. wrong answers.
 
4:34 PM
@vzn: No. PhD student.
 
@DavidZ Damn, I guessed that was the case when my flag request to delete it went unanswered :-( Oh well.
 
Yep.
 
@JohnRennie Is there a reason you can't just, y'know, correct it?
 
That would be my suggestion as well
 
@ACuriousMind Maybe there's not a right answer
 
4:36 PM
@ACuriousMind OK, I'll give a link, but no throwing stones at me please ...
7
A: Does the Pauli exclusion principle instantaneously affect distant electrons?

John RennieThe Pauli exclusion principle can be stated as "two electrons cannot occupy the same energy state", but this is really only a rough way of stating it. It's more precise to say that the wavefunction of a system is anti-symmetric with respect to exchange of two electrons. The trouble is that now I ...

 
@0celo7 well, in that case the question should be put on hold
 
Speaking as one five years older and wiser I think my answer is fundamentally misconceived and probably beyond redemption.
 
@vzn: in quantum information from the mathematical side...
 
vzn
@Martin yes interesting saw your profile. have studied nonlocality etc for many yrs
for the QM guys & anyone else, fyi, heres some actual recent/ new physics! think this could be a really big deal, tip of a very big iceberg so to speak...
 
@JohnRennie I don't think so. IMO it's fine as a relatively nontechnical description. Now, nontechnical descriptions aren't really what we go for here, but still, I think it could definitely be edited to be more technically correct.
The comments are overreacting, if you ask me.
 
vzn
4:39 PM
it reminds me of the heisenberg uncertainty principle... and we all know how important that turned out to be =D
 
@DavidZ the northern Europeans tend to be, erm, forthright when expressing their views :-)
 
@JohnRennie Hm, upon reading it, it's wrong, but not horribly so. If you make the wavefunction depend on position instead of electrons, it's actually correct - the Pauli exclusion principle is due to such a minus in front of a state. ArnoldNeumaier's comment is hyperbole.
 
vzn
aka complementarity
 
Completely formally, we conclude the exclusion principle from the anticommutation of fermionic creation operators, which means that creating the same fermion twice gives a state that is its own negative, hence zero (i.e. not a state at all).
 
@ACuriousMind thanks, maybe I'll revisit it and have a go at tidying it.For the last five years I've been trying to pretend it doesn't exist.
 
4:43 PM
@vzn: I haven't really worked on non-locality. I know some basics in contextuality but not enough to actually comment on the importance of this stuff.
 
That the "phase is unphysical" is a red herring. Although a phase is unphyiscal $\psi = -\psi$ still forces a vector in a Hilbert space to vanish, even though both $\psi$ and $-\psi$ represent the same state.
 
What's a blue herring
 
vzn
@Martin not so familiar with contextuality myself either. its (apparently) much more modern than nonlocality. anyway it will take some time for the (new) ideas to "percolate/ disseminate".
 
@vzn math and math physics research mostly
let's say analysis with some (at times vague) connections to physics ;-P
 
vzn
@yuggib vague indeed :|
 
4:47 PM
@yuggib is Ricci flow used in math.phys at all
 
@vzn :-D
@0celo7 not that I know
but it is possible
 
@vzn: Not really. The basic idea (Kochen-Specker) was introduced in the sixties also by Bell. Peres studied it extensively in the 90s (I actually learned about it from his famous book on quantum mechanics), it's just that it was studied experimentally much later.
 
vzn
@0celo7 it was used by perelman, a topic that came up recently =D
@Martin afaik bell never referred to "contextuality". afaik/ afaict reference by that name is "relatively recent". (does it show up more in 3-photon/particle experiments?)
 
@vzn: Yes, okay the name might be recent.
@vzn: I don't know whether it's more common there. There are experiments with two-photon states.
Maybe you've heard about "topos approach to quantum mechanics". It's a highly hypothetical fundamental approach to quantum mechanics advocated by some people at Oxford (Isham among others) also somewhat within the framework of categorical quantum mechanics. They really use contextuality a lot. If they have ideas that turn out to be useful at all, this would imply that we are going to see a focus away from non-locality to contextuality in the future...
 
@vzn that's not physics.
 
vzn
4:57 PM
@0celo7 lol so then a zen(-like?) question for you, is ricci flow physics or not?
@Martin have heard some about "topological qubits" (sounds exotic, dont know much, hear theres some experimental progress). actually recall an article saying the NSA was betting on the approach via 1 main researcher.
 
@vzn no
I want to know if a certain math thing has applications in physics.
 
vzn
@0celo7 so then why the @#%& are you asking about/ studying it? :P
 
What?
 
vzn
@0celo7 3s with google: arxiv.org/abs/0708.2144
 
@vzn: No, that's something different. "Topological qubit" is just a fancy way to speak about a qubit which is noise-protected due to the setup of the quantum computer. The "Topos approach" is the use of topos theory to construct quantum mechanics. A "topos" is basically a generalization of set theory and there is a correspondence between a topos and a logic.
 
5:02 PM
Anyway, it's time for our chat session to be over. I need to be off, it's 1 AM here, but feel free to keep chatting. See everyone at the next session in two weeks!
 
The idea behind this approach is that maybe a two-valued logic is no good and their "wave-function" is something like a hidden variable containing information for every possible measurement context. The ideas are kind of funny but the physical value (at least at this point) is rather dubious.
Here's a review: arxiv.org/abs/1106.5660
 
@vzn my google search came up empty
 
5:20 PM
stuff i like about TAing for quantum physics: i know how the math works and can answer almost any student question easily enough
stuff i don't like: worrying whether textbook (Eisberg and Resnick) is actually makes sense everywhere
especially when i think it's wrong/misleading on a certain point, and it's that passage the prof cited when i disagreed with him on how he wrote a quiz problem :/
 
6:13 PM
-1
Q: The integration of Einstein's equations

Aleksander KlimetsEinstein's equation is $$G_{\mu\nu} + \Lambda g_{\mu\nu} = {8 \pi G \over c^4} T_{\mu\nu}$$ where $G_{\mu\nu} = R_{\mu\nu} - (1/2)g_{\mu\nu}\,R$ is the Einstein tensor, which combines the Ricci tensor, the scalar curvature and the metric tensor, $\Lambda$ is the cosmological constant, $T_{\mu\nu...

@ACuriousMind So many errors!
What is this "small domain" business? Sounds like some damn physics thing.
Random Schwarzschild radius!
 
That whole thing is just advanced numerology
 
@ACuriousMind Yup. I'm impressed though.
And to be fair, the standard derivation of the Hawking temperature is numerology.
 
How are we defining "numerology" here?
To be fair ;)
 
Throwing together random concepts and symbols and getting some "amazing" result that's not true because you inappropriately threw together random concepts and symbols.
 
vzn
@Martin thx, sounds quite "bohmian"...
 
6:23 PM
@0celo7 me?
 
No
The general "you"
 
No
The German man
That's the only fault of the lingua Anglica
It doesn't have man
 
@Sᴋᴜʟʟᴘᴇᴛʀᴏʟ He meant the generic "you".
Strangely, most Germanic languages lost their distinct word for that type of indefinite pronoun, German being one of the few to retain it.
 
6:34 PM
I see.
thx
 
@vzn: in the sense that they want a more realist description (the ultimate idea is to get rid of observers completely), but in another sense it's completely different, because they don't impose that the position is a hidden variable (which is rather arbitrary and seems to me mainly due to ontological reasons). They want to change the underlying logic.
Still, it's completely unclear how and when this translates into a viable physical description - but maybe if you like contextuality and non-locality, it's an interesting thing!
 
This looks interesting.
 
6:50 PM
@Sᴋᴜʟʟᴘᴇᴛʀᴏʟ damn cool!
 
7:24 PM
Proof?
 
8:03 PM
Are fewer grad students pursuing String Theory?
 
I don't think so.
Then again, I'm working from a "bastion of strings" ;)
LMU has an oversized string group
 
@Sᴋᴜʟʟᴘᴇᴛʀᴏʟ Life.
@ACuriousMind Why didn't you VTC that numerology question?
 
Because I'm out of close votes?
 
What about it? @0celo7
 
@ACuriousMind Oh, I keep forgetting that's a thing.
What should I VTC as?
Check my work?
 
8:12 PM
Well, if you vote to close that question, you should know why you want to close it, no?
 
@ACuriousMind IMO there are three groups of questions
Good ones, bad ones, nonsense.
Sadly the latter two are not actual close reasons.
 
The good, the bad, and the ugly?
 
Pretty much
 
vzn
@Martin think there are some abstract conceptual frameworks being developed that open up/ hint at a more specific hidden variable theory (have blogged on this at length) & that it will take years to isolate it, but that the shadows/ outlines/ glimmers are now vaguely/ roughly visible.
 
Today in PDE we did more Bessel functions and Legendre polynomials. Two pages of infinite series. That's the ugly.
 
8:15 PM
You gotta kiss a lot of frogs before you find a princess ;)
 
Are you saying my gf is a frog
Or my PDE class is a frog
 
Just a general statement about life.
 
> I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because you haven't defined most of the terms and this seems to be an advanced numerology problem, not physics.
@ACuriousMind ;)
@yuggib awesome
 
8:42 PM
@ACuriousMind Suppose I have two quadratic forms $g,h:V\times V\to\mathbb{R}$. Then it is certainly not true in general that $g(X,v)=\lambda h(X,v)$, $\lambda=$const. for some fixed $X\in V$ for all $v\in V$...or is it? I've determined that if $\lambda=\lambda(v)$, then it does not depend on the scale of $v$, only the direction.
I've tried showing that $\lambda(v+w)=\lambda(v)+\lambda(w)$, but that doesn't work either.
I've also done the above equation with $v+kw$ in place of $v$ and then differentiated wrt. $k$ to get $\mathrm{d}\lambda/\mathrm{d}k=0$, but I actually got $\lambda\sim 1/k$ from that.
Would you happen to know if it's true?
 
9:38 PM
@0celo7 It's obviously true for $X=0$.
 
@ACuriousMind Sorry?
$X\ne 0$.
(Although I still don't know what you mean.)
Also $h(X,X)=1$, I'm not sure if that's important.
 
@0celo7 If you choose $X = 0$, then $g(X,v) = 0 = h(X,v) $.
 
@ACuriousMind Yeah, but that doesn't tell me anything about $\lambda$.
But $\lambda$ doesn't even have meaning in that case.
 
Wait, would you mind stating clearly and with all assumptions what statement you are seeking to prove/disprove here?
 
@ACuriousMind $g,h$ are bilinear forms, $X\ne 0$ and $h(X,X)=1$.
Then if we write $g(X,v)=\lambda(v)h(X,v)$, then $\lambda(v)=\lambda$. That is, $\lambda$ does not depend on $v$.
 
9:43 PM
The "if" is vacuous, because you can define $\lambda(v) = g(X,v)/h(X,v)$.
 
Yes, I know. Poor wording.
Better?
 
Yes, but it is pretty obvious to me that statement is false.
 
Why?
@ACuriousMind Is there a natural way of defining an eigenvector of a quadratic form?
Oh $g,h$ are also nondegenerate.
@ACuriousMind Pick a basis $\{E_i\}$ of $V$, then write $g_{ij}=g(E_i,E_j), h_{ij}=h(E_i,E_j)$ so I can write in proper notation.
Maybe I can define the "eigenvalue" of $X$ and $g$ wrt. $h$ via $h^{ij}g_{jk}X^k=\lambda X^i$ or something
Well, that's exactly what I wrote above.
@ACuriousMind I...I think that works.
 
@0celo7 Choose the standard bilinear form on $\mathbb{R}^2$ as $h$, and $\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}$ as the matrix of $g$. Then, $h(e_1,e_1) = 1$ and $g(e_1,e_1) = 0$, so $\lambda(e_1) = 0$, and so if $\lambda$ were independent of $v$, $g(e_1,v) = 0$ for all $v$, which is false since $g$ is non-degenerate.
 
Ok, so $h^{ij}g_{jk}$ is just a matrix and has negative determinant, so it has an eigenvector with negative eigenvalue.
So, now I need to prove that $X$ is unique...
 
9:59 PM
I have no idea what you are doing.
 
@ACuriousMind What part is confusing you
 
Why you are talking about eigenvalues.
 
@ACuriousMind If you didn't know already, $g$ is a Lorentz metric and $h$ is a Riemannian metric
 
What you are trying to prove.
@0celo7 Funny, my counterexample has exactly that ;)
 
I need to prove that there is a unique vector $X$ for which $g(X,v)=\lambda h(X,v)$, $\lambda <0$
 
10:00 PM
Not referring to this conversation specifically, I'm beginning to think no one on this site understands relativity.
 
where $X$ is scaled so $h(X,X)=1$
@barrycarter Full disclosure: I have no clue what the fuck I'm doing.
 
@barrycarter I am certain we have users who don't, but I am also certain we have users who do.
 
@0celo7 That's true for me all the time about everything.
@ACuriousMind I should've qualified that with "or, if they do, they're not the ones answering my questions :)"
 
@ACuriousMind Does my question make more sense now?
 
@0celo7 Not really, because the claim is still wrong, as evidenced by the standard Riemannian and Lorentzian metric on $\mathbb{R}^2$. Always look at examples before you try to prove something.
 
10:03 PM
I can define $\lambda$ as the unique negative eigenvalue of $h^{ij}g_{jk}$.
@ACuriousMind Ah, but you have to pick a special $X$!
This was not clear to me, now it is.
It's an eigenvector of $h^{ij}g_{jk}$, viewed as a matrix $M^i{}_j$.
What are the eigenvectors of your $h$?
(-1,1) and (1,1) according to magic
So $e_1$ is not an admissible $X$!
 
My $g$ is just the Minkowski metric in light-cone coordinates, so of course the eigenvectors are the space and time directions (which are the vectors you wrote down there).
 
@ACuriousMind Um
in your example, $h=I$ as a matrix right?
 
Yes. Which is why I said "my $g$".
 
So $hg=g$
The eigenvectors of $g$ are (-1,1) and (1,1)
ugh I can't matrix multiplication
is one of those vectors your $e_1$?
 
$e_1$ is intended to be the standard basis vector in 1-direction.
 
10:10 PM
ok, but that's not an eigenvector of $g$!
 
You never demanded it to be until now.
 
Well, it just dawned on me!
Sorry
Ok, so $X$ is an eigenvector of $h^{-1}g$ with negative eigenvalue.
Claim: There is precisely one such vector up to a scale.
 
...you found already two eigenvectors.
 
:(
The eigenvalues are -1 and 1
So it's the first one that's the X for your example
Diagonalize $h^{-1}g$...and apply the Sylvester law of inertia?
 
Look, for a normalized vector $X$, the $\lambda$ can't be constant. As you move the second vector around the unit circle, the Riemannian metric stays 1, while the Lorentzian varies smoothly between $1$ and $-1$.
 
10:16 PM
@ACuriousMind The ending of Transistor is kinda unexpected
 
@ACuriousMind Huh? Can you find a continuum of vectors for which $h^{ij}g_{jk}X^k=\lambda X^i$ is true?
 
@Danu Why, yes it is!
 
Sadfaces abound
If the sword stays "conscious" then it's rather cruel :P
 
@0celo7 You're not making sense to me.
 
@ACuriousMind Ok, the matrix $h^{-1}g$ has one negative eigenvalue. Denote the eigenvector corresponding to this matrix by $X$ with eigenvalue $\lambda$.
Fix the scale of $X$ to be $1$ wrt. $h$.
Note that $\lambda=g(X,X)$.
One writes $h^{ij}g_{jk}X^k=\lambda X^i$ in standard notation as $g(X,.)=\lambda h(X,.)$
 
10:23 PM
@Danu Well, it's not really a satisfactory ending
 
@ACuriousMind It's quite confusing. I like that though.
 
Hey @0celo7
Did you try doing like
 
@Slereah yeah?
 
$\langle X + v, X - v \rangle$
Or some variation thereof
 
This theory of Cloudbank being virtual is interesting
 
10:26 PM
I don't know
 
Yes, fucking tons.
 
Maybe two +
oh
 
But for what?
 
Then I dunno
 
I'm pretty sure I've got it now.
 
10:26 PM
Just a hunch
Oh so what was the proof
 
Wald has a fucking typo is the proof.
Now I just need to figure out some stuff
 
@Danu Of course it's virtual. It's a city in the cloud ;)
 
@ACuriousMind Yeah, sure, it makes a lot of sense.
 
So in the double cover we can consistently pick a future light cone
 
But then the question is whether there is still a "real" world outside. If there isn't then there's no point in calling it virtual
 
10:29 PM
@Danu Well, that's your position (and I'd agree), but that's far from a universal attitude
 
Ok, so let $X$ be the vector which satisfies $g(X,v)=\lambda(p)h(X,v)$
for all $v\in T_pM$, and this should be true for all $p\in M$
and $\lambda:M\to (-\infty,0)$
Now I know that at each point I can pick such an $X$, but I have no clue how to prove it's $C^0$ on $M$, nevermind $C^\infty$.
 
@Danu You know what's even more interesting is what I got in my Twitter feed
 
@Slereah Any ideas?
 
last year in the US the top 25 hedge fund managers earned more income than 425,000 public school teachers
 
How do you prove continuity, anyway
take limits, that's not very practical
 
10:37 PM
@0celo7 Look at preimages of open subsets, obviously :P
 
@Danu even less practical!
 
Did you get iOS 9.3 @0celo7?
 
@Sᴋᴜʟʟᴘᴇᴛʀᴏʟ No.
 
@Danu Perfect mathematician's answer: Completely correct, yet completely useless ;)
 
@ACuriousMind I actually find it to quite practical, most of the time.
 
10:38 PM
well all I need to show is that $\lambda$ is smooth, maybe.
no, that doesn't work
 
10:52 PM
@Slereah Oh, remember the nonorientable spacetime in chap 8 of Wald that you wanted to find a metric for?
 
I do
 
I know what it is
 
What is it!
 
...Shouten.
That's my price.
Fwiw, you were close!
 
Sorry, I don't negociate with terrorists
 
Ah! A mod!
Hide the crack pipe
 
Quick, free the GR goblin from his cage!
 
It clearly says is not the same as , but they are in fact tag synonyms
 
Hi @StrongBad
 
Many nuances
 
10:57 PM
@Danu hi
 
@StrongBad See this, the new proper tags are and .
 
52
A: Getting started self-studying general relativity

David ZI can only recommend textbooks because that's what I've used, but here are some suggestions: Gravity: An Introduction To General Relativity by James Hartle is reasonably good as an introduction, although in order to make the content accessible, he does skip over a lot of mathematical detail. Fo...

I should write a complete answer to this.
 
That's quite an aggressive looking avatar @StrongBad
 
@ACuriousMind okay, so it is messy over here too.
 

« first day (1965 days earlier)      last day (2970 days later) »