« first day (2234 days earlier)      last day (1007 days later) » 
00:00 - 11:0011:00 - 00:00

11:38 AM
@DanielSank Algebras, never algebrae - it's not a Latin word.
 
@ACuriousMind
What is the difference between an analytic function and a regular function
 
That depends on what your definition of "regular" is
 
What can it be?
 
I think it has something to do with branch points in complex analysis, but I'm not sure, and I don't think there's a definition widely used
 
Quite unfortunate
I often see it thrown around but I never see any definition
 
11:44 AM
In what context exactly did you find is?
 
And when I go see it, it seems to just mean analytic
A few contexts
usually I see it as "It's all cool because the solution is regular"
Example :
 
I think "regular" might just mean "not singular" there
 
It seems to sometimes mean analytic, sometimes $C^r$ and sometimes non-singular
blah
Basically it's a word that just means "the function is not bad"
for varying degrees of bad
 
0
A: How can we combat arrogance and ignorance on physics stack exchange?

John RennieThe question of how to decide what is right and wrong in science is a vexed one and always has been. The current approach is peer review, but of course the problem is how to select the peers. Eminent scientists have been wrong in the past and will be wrong again, so ultimately no-one’s judgement ...

That is at least an hours work trying to be as objective as possible and resist the temptation to ad hominem comments.
I think I've done pretty well.
Bearing mind that the original post is a thinly veiled attack on me.
 
lol Duffield
I'd say that since we banned him arrogance and ignorance have gone down a fair amount
 
11:56 AM
@Slereah now don't you go spoiling my good work in avoiding the personal attacks!!
 
(John Duffield smells)
 
I'll leave this here
 
0
Q: Encyclopedia of the best questions and answers

GRBI see sometimes that some interesting questions that appear on the site have already been asked in the past and are flagged as duplicates. I thought it could be interesting to have a collection of the most asked, important and/or well-answered questions. It's still a vague idea, also because I do...

 
BTW I love British accent
I see. I don't like you people chatting when I'm not around...
BTW whose the man in JR's profile picture?
 
@JohnRennie "If I disagree with an answer to the extent that I want to downvote it I will look to see if there is a better answer, and if there is no better answer I will post one." - but one can disagree with an answer for missing the point of the question, or for presenting a clearly fallacious argument, or for just making no sense at all without knowing what the correct answer is
 
12:09 PM
and what happened to CW?
Ah, so many questions...
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform It's JR
@AccidentalFourierTransform He voluntarily deleted his account without telling anyone why (although there's some speculation in the chat log which I would ask everyone not to re-hash now)
 
May 25 at 19:16, by AccidentalFourierTransform
eg, @JohnRennie may I ask you whos the handsome gentleman from your profile picture?
 
Sigh...my ironymeter isn't well-calibrated today, it seems :/
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform if you don't want stuff here don't put here is first place.
 
oh no I got in troubles
apologies to all moderators for wasting their time
(I should definitely flag my comment above, asking the moderators to delete it for me)
 
12:20 PM
@AccidentalFourierTransform no problem have a nice day.
 
@JorgeB. same to you. Happy holidays.
 
Jim
1:07 PM
ah, last day of work before my holiday vacation starts
Working in academia is the best
 
If you get holiday vacations it's not really academia :-P
 
Hey @ACuriousMind that's a lot of close-queue reviews with unilateral votes.
2
Anything specific going on?
With, say, this one, I would say it's better to let the queue take care of it. The bulk of closures are meant to be handled there.
 
1:39 PM
The queue had around 40 items in it, which is unusually large, so I thought I'd reduce it to the usual level by voting on the clear cut cases or those where I was the fourth or fifth vote.
If this size turns out not to have been a fluke, I won't do that regularly
 
Mew
1:51 PM
@koolman @heather users can now edit closed questions
 
Jim
@DavidZ The university closes for two weeks around christmas. I get those weeks off as a result
So do the professors
 
2:53 PM
@MAFIA36790: you need to remove your comment to my answer in the meta. Your comment doesn't contribute anything useful and it is just going to inflame things.
@ACuriousMind yes I agree (I'm sure you didn't think I wouldn't). What I describe is an ideal situation in which we all have unlimited time and, perhaps more importantly, unlimited patience to write answers.
 
user116211
3:06 PM
Sorry @JohnR; he is already pissed off, I think.
 
user116211
Hey @AccidentalFourierTransform; long time, no see in the chat; anyway welcome again.
 
3:25 PM
@Jim ah, nice. For me, this was not taken for granted.
 
@MAFIA36790 Hi :-)
what have you been up to?
 
3:44 PM
0
Q: Awarding Informed Badge

Rahul KumarI think the " Informed " Badge must not be given so easily . Before giving the informed badge , newcomers should not only be briefed about basic rules and regulations of Physics SE , but also :- Be given more information about the system of badges and reputation . Be given a short article on u...

 
4:00 PM
speaking of badges
60
Q: A New Silver Badge That Robots Simply Can't Win

Tim PostWe don't do a lot of socialization on Stack Overflow, or even Meta Stack Overflow. In fact, we really don't do any socializing. But, that doesn't mean being social and having informal conversations is bad in any way, we'd just rather that folks do it somewhere else. Somewhere else turns out to ...

 
4:14 PM
Hi nerds
 
4:56 PM
@AccidentalFourierTransform: are you around?
 
@JohnRennie yes
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform thanks. Equation (3) in your answer here:
5
Q: How does the inclusion of vacuum energy modify Newtonian gravity equation of motion?

JoshuaThe equation of motion (in the center of mass frame) due only to gravitational forces between two point masses is: $$\frac{d^2r}{dt^2} = -\frac{GM}{r^2}$$ How does the equation get modified when a repulsive force due to vacuum energy/dark energy is included?

What are the dimensions of $\Lambda$?
 
You can tell from the definition... It's an energy density, once you divide by $G$
 
I though the cc had dimensions of $m^{-2}$ but your equation wouldn't be dimensionally consistent if that were the case.
Your equation requires the dimensions be $t^{-2}$
 
Ah, I don't remember... let me think about it
Well, from the first equation $[\Lambda]=[G\rho]$, as Danu says
 
5:02 PM
I wonder if what you have there is $c^2\Lambda$
 
My analysis tells me it's got to be $[L]^2/[T]^4$ @JohnRennie
Since $\rho$ has units $[M]/([L][T]^2)$ and $G$ has units $[L]^3/([M][T]^2)$
 
@JohnRennie at least, here: arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0004037v2
eq. 2.6 agrees with my second equation
 
There have to be some suppressed constants
$GM/r$ cannot equal $\Lambda r$ without suppressed constants
There is a $c^2$ missing
In one of the two
 
Wait, $\Lambda=G\rho/c^2$
 
okay
that solves it
I have to say that setting $c=1$ when taking the Newtonian limit is bad form :P
 
5:08 PM
@Danu That was my thought.
Aha!
 
my bad, sorry :-P
 
In that case re this question:
0
Q: Orbits in an universal expansion?

Fluid Space ManHas anyone worked out the math for the motion of objects in distant orbits accounting for both gravity and universal expansion? Objects in very distant orbits in expanding space-time should orbit more slowly than when accounting for gravity alone. Eventually at some great distance an orbit will...

 
Wtf?
 
I make the point where the CC balances the Sun's gravity at about 10,000 light years, not the Kuiper belt!
 
I assume OP made a calculational error
 
5:11 PM
Always assume OP made a calculational error
Especially when I am OP
 
5:55 PM
The cosmological constant is quoted in all sorts of different units. Wikipedia quotes is as $1.19 \times 10^{-52}$ m$^{-2}$, or as $10^{-35}$ s$^{-2}$ or as $10^{-29}$ g/cm$^{-3}$. All the same number but with various factors of $c^2$ and $8\pi G$ thrown in.
 
I like to work in the metric convention where $\Lambda$ is imaginary.
Also, in imaginary $y$ axis so that $\eta=(-1,+1,-1,+1)$.
 
6:50 PM
folks seen this notice?
 
huh, that's new, isn't it?
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform yeah
 
 
1 hour later…
8:04 PM
@EmilioPisanty yes, one of my old answers got bumped with that message a few days ago. I got a couple of upvotes out of it :-) I must admit I didn't realise it was new. I just assumed that feature had always been there.
 
 
2 hours later…
10:01 PM
@EmilioPisanty I like it.
 
There. Take that!
0
A: How can we combat arrogance and ignorance on physics stack exchange?

John RennieI’m going to post this as a separate answer because it’s not a direct answer to the question. However I think, or at least I hope, it addresses the underlying problem that has led to your post. The crux of the matter is that the theory of relativity taught to today’s physics students is not the ...

 
@JohnRennie Wow, that's . . . fairly polite. Nicely put.
 
10:21 PM
@JohnRennie the bumping's always been there. it now tells you it's doing it, instead of leaving you to wonder why it's on the front page
@JohnRennie nice answer. Unfortunately the question is now at score < -8 which means that it doesn't show on the front page of meta, which I don't think is a good thing.
I don't think mods have the power to undo the visibility thing? It would be nice if they did. This isn't a nice conversation to have but it doesn't serve anyone to hide it from view.
 
10:50 PM
...apparently not.
 
 
1 hour later…
11:55 PM
@EmilioPisanty No, we do not. Visibility is based on votes. And stuff that's been so heavily downvoted generally is not worth showing off. (Note the difference between "not showing off" and actually hiding in the sense that deleted posts are hidden.) There are of course exceptions, more frequently on meta, but still they're rare enough that I don't think it's worth adjusting the system to allow for them.
 
00:00 - 11:0011:00 - 00:00

« first day (2234 days earlier)      last day (1007 days later) »