« first day (2248 days earlier)      last day (2695 days later) » 

12:00 AM
I confess I will probably never forget this question. — Alfred Centauri 21 mins ago
5
lol - so true.
the universe is just sprayed out of an aerosol can. used to be sold at your standard gas station, but then was banned because of CFCs.
any mod, could you mod-hammer that question?
 
this is really cute:
16
Q: Obtaining MIT licence for own plugin

Benjamin WI'm a new web programmer, I wrote a simple plugin in JavaScript and I want to put it on GitHub for people to download and use it freely. I saw many people include MIT licence in a file. How can I obtain the MIT licence? Do I have to go to http://opensource.org to apply/register or do I just need...

 
aww
 
:-/
Nice comment @EmilioPisanty
 
@Pissedofflayman yeah, TLDR Legal is awesome
@Sanya WaybackMachined for later reference. That one's golden but it will rightfully go the way of SE's automated vacuum cleaner.
3
 
@Kenshin, i really hope you're not serious on the aerosol can question.
gtg, have a good day all.
 
12:13 AM
@heather you think so?
 
no, i'm just confirming
 
lol
na just kidding of course
 
=)
 
laterz @heather
 
@EmilioPisanty that's a good idea - even though I'd like an "archive of weirdest questions" or "archive of bad question stereotypes" :D
thanks =)
 
12:14 AM
yay its immortalized =D
(nearly, anyway.)
 
@Loong yep, sth like that for physics only :D
 
12:30 AM
i just did an experiment and got outcome a. i'm also reading a paper where a scientist did the same experiment but got the opposite of outcome a. any suggestions?
 
repeat the experiment and search for more sources?
 
the sources have been just as confusing. :-( out of 7 sources, 3 got outcome a and 4 got outcome b. i've repeated the experiment a few times and its always a
eh
i'll just flip a coin or something
 
but this is a perfectly fine result
you can quote those seven papers, describe your experimental setup as well as possible and describe your results
then I'd think about possible influence factors that might not be controlled and might influence the outcome
furthermore, maybe you can try to identify differences in the experimental setups described
but in the end, your results are perfectly valid and quoting all the literature is the most scientific thing to do
 
i'll do that.
thanks for your help
 
sure =)
 
user228700
12:41 AM
@DanielSank I'm not too sure about "far more pressure" but there is a great deal of pressure, yes. Ask @Secret.
 
HalO KAumu
yes I think India would have more pressure than USA
 
user228700
Hey, @Kenshin: :-) Yeah, perhaps.
 
do u celebrate new years eve @Kaumudi.H
 
ohh god new years soon
and personal growth
 
yeah like tmr
 
12:44 AM
how???
 
time flows man
 
too true
 
we don't have time machines yet, physicists need to lift their game
 
@Kenshin maybe you could do it
 
i'm not a physicist
I'm a samurai can't u see
 
12:47 AM
didn't you build a time machine to get here?
 
yeah but that was invented in the future
by someone else
 
the nobel prize you received should convince me otherwise
 
u know about that?
 
yes
i am from the future
anyway i have to return to my bathroom lab
 
ok catcha later
 
12:50 AM
goodbye samurai from the past
 
sayonara
 
user228700
@Kenshin Nope.
 
user228700
I'll answer in detail in a bit. For now, I have a quick question.
 
oh
yeah go ahead
 
user228700
For quantities whose magnitude is determined by the dot product b/w two vectors (eg: Work), what is the minimum value? Let the two vectors in question be $\vec{a}$ and $\vec{b}$. Is the minimum value 0 or $-|\vec{a}| |\vec{b}|$ ?
 
user228700
12:56 AM
(I'm asking about the general convention here)
 
is there a context?
it would depend on exactly how the question is asked
e.g. if it said what is the minimum magnitude, or minimum absolute value I'd say 0
if it said was the minimum value of a.b then I'd say -|a||b|
but generally "minimum" means most left on the number line so without context I'd have to say -|a||b|
 
user228700
That makes sense. Well, okay, if I were asked to find out the minimum value of work done on an object, given the force applied and the displacement of the object, would that be 0 or $-|\vec{a}| |\vec{b}|$ ?
 
hmm
that would be a weird question
is this actually a question?
because if the force is in the opposite direction to the displacement, how is the object even moving?
 
user228700
Therein lies the confusion.
 
and if the force is perpenduclar to the object, again what is causing the object's displacement to change
 
user228700
1:02 AM
@Kenshin Lol, um, I remember that when I was in high school, we had a question like this, with the magnetic field doing work on a charged particle...well, um, no, not the magnetic field, but uh, dang it.
 
user228700
I did have a question like this tho :-/ I just don't remember any of the details. All I remember was all of us nerds arguing about whether the answer is 0 or the - thing after the exam.
 
user228700
And it turned out that our teacher had wanted us to write 0 but yeah, what to do in such cases?
 
was it multiple choice?
in such a case I would give both answers
I'd say the minimum value is -|a||b| while the minimum absolute value would be 0
 
user228700
Ur answer would be marked wrong if u give both answers. It's an OMR sheet.
 
is that multiple choice?
 
user228700
1:04 AM
 
i see
I can only hope that the question did give some clue to differentiate between 0 and -|a||b|
 
user228700
Alright, I will ask more people here and see what the general opinion is. Thanks :-)
 
np
 
1:41 AM
w00t, uploaded a package to CTAN.
 
user228700
2:13 AM
I come with a homework question. Given two vectors $\vec{a}$ and $\vec{b}$, I've been asked to find the component of $\vec{b}$ in the plane of $\vec{a}$ & $\vec{b}$ but also perpendicular to $\vec{a}$.
 
@Kaumudi.H ok...
 
user228700
I couldn't figure it out on my own so I caved and checked the solution after trying for a little while and the solution has given the answer as $\vec{b} - \{(\vec{a}.\vec{b})/a^2\}.\vec{a}$
 
Yeah that looks right.
 
user228700
I don't understand how...
 
A considerably easier way to write it is $$\vec{b} - \hat{a}(\vec{b} \cdot \hat{a})$$ where $\hat{a}$ means "unit vector in the direction of $\vec{a}$".
 
user228700
2:17 AM
Yeah...
 
user228700
Gimme minute.
 
Well, what have you figured out so far?
 
user228700
Well, $\hat{a}(\vec{b} \cdot \hat{a})$ gives the component of $\vec{b}$ along $\vec{a}$.
 
user228700
No, wait.
 
lol
Ok, I won't give hints.
 
user228700
2:21 AM
:-| I was correct. That does give the component of $\vec{b}$ along $\vec{a}$.
 
yes.
 
user228700
I'm trying to figure out how subtracting this vector from $\vec{b}$ gives a vector that is perpendicular to $\vec{a}$.
 
If I have no component along $\vec{a}$, then I'm perpendicular to it by definition.
 
user228700
Ohh, right :-/
 
Try computing the dot product of $\vec{a}$ and $\vec{b} - \hat{a}(\vec{b} \cdot \hat{a})$.
 
user228700
2:28 AM
Yup. Zero.
 
user228700
It didn't occur to me to actually remove the component of $\vec{b}$ along $\vec{a}$.
 
Good morning :-)
 
user228700
Wokay, @DanielS: Dhanyavaad :-)
 
user228700
@koolman G'morning :-)
 
@Kaumudi.H ?
@Kaumudi.H With vectors, one can be rather brutal.
 
user228700
2:31 AM
@DanielSank Lol :-P Dhanyavaad = Thanks in Hindi.
 
user228700
You gots to know at least that much if you plan on visiting someday :-)
 
user228700
Huh. Where did @MAFIA go? :-o @user276738: Oh, is that you? Were you the one who asked this question:
 
user228700
3
Q: Why does delocalization of pi electrons bring stability?

user276738My book mentions that Delocalization of $\pi$ electrons makes a compound stable as the process of delocalization involves loss in internal energy. This is the synopsis of resonance. But how does shifting of $\pi$ electrons let the body lose internal energy? What is the cause? While studyin...

 
user228700
I recognize your dog :-) Which textbook is it?
 
@Kaumudi.H Bah. I'll learn it later.
I'm doing Russian now.
When I get ready to come to India I'll cram Hindi for a while.
 
user228700
2:41 AM
Ah, okay.
 
But I'll have a horrible accent.
 
user228700
Obviously :-P
 
I can imitate accents well but I need to hear it.
I don't know anyone who speaks Hindi.
 
user228700
YouTube!
 
I can do a passable imitation of an Indian speaking English with an accent...
 
user228700
2:42 AM
x'D I see.
 
user228700
Does anybody here know any Organic Chemistry?
 
user228700
 
user228700
It seems that the larger the number of $\alpha$ hydrogen atoms, the more stable the structure is. I realize that a larger number of $\alpha$ hydrogen atoms corresponds to a higher charge density on the ring but why does this increase the stability of the compound?
 
user228700
(I have been quick to post this here as well because nobody ever answers queries on the CSE chat these days.)
 
That's the hyperconjugation problem. The more adjacent CH bonds, the better the hyperconjugation, thus the more the electron cloud is delocalised over the whole molecule, hence more stable
 
user228700
2:56 AM
Yes, but why does delocalization correspond to more stability?
 
If your electron cloud is localised, it basically mean there is a large charge density clustered in a small region. To first order this is higher energy because of columbic repulsion
 
user228700
Riight. Alright, thanks! :-)
 
Or in more quantum mechanical terms, the probability of finding electrons close together is much higher, hence higher expectation value for the repulsive force
 
user228700
^ I don't quite understand that because I dunno what "expectation value" is and how it is related to the repulsive force but that's okay, I don't need to. Thanks.
 
user228700
Ooh, dyou know anything about Negative hyperconjugation? Like this:
 
user228700
3:01 AM
 
O, that's hyperconjugation that move to the opposite direction of the normal one. Here you have a filled $\pi$ orbital or system donating electrons to the empty $\sigma^*$ orbital, stablising the whole molecule by elongating the C-X bonds
The resonance strucrtures are exactly as drawn, you have - formal charges on the electronegative atom
 
user228700
It donates to an empty ${\sigma}^{*}$ orbital?
 
yes
 
user228700
How so? This is not so clear to me...
 
the point is, when any two molecule orbital mix, they form a more stable bonding moelcular orbital and less stable antibonding molecular orbital. The electrons in the molecule then only fill in the stable ones, thus you get an overall stablisation
 
user228700
3:04 AM
Yes, this much I know from what MOT I've learned so far...
 
So here, you overlap $\sigma^*$ in the C-X bond and the $\pi$ system to generate those two new MOs
and the electrons end up distributed closer to the C-X bonds
opposite to normal hyperconjugation
 
user228700
Huh. Perhaps I don't need to look into this so much (Since it hasn't been explained using MOT in my textbook) Thanks anyway :-)
 
user228700
Is this effect very important when writing mechanisms and such?
 
Hyperconjugation is in general quite important in explaining many reactions. In 2001, there's a paper that suggest the reason why a staggeredd conformation is more stable is because of hyperconjugation more than because of sterics
So if you plan to do more organic and physical organic chemistry, learn hyperconjugation well
 
user228700
No, not hyperconjugation, I meant negative/reverse hyperconjugation.
 
3:09 AM
Yes, they are important in the reactions of fluorinated molecules, which are used in drugs and biological probes
and fluorine chemistry is a big field
 
user228700
Wow, I see. OK, thanks :-)
 
They also important in nitrogen compounds with double bonds like those shown in your book, which are often related to other drugs and dyes
 
user228700
Hmm, I see.
 
user228700
My textbook says:
 
user228700
> "In case of reverse hyperconjugation, there is a decrease in electron density at $\pi-$ bond."
 
user228700
3:13 AM
As far as I understand it, doesn't the electron density simply shift from one $\pi-$ bond to another, as in resonance? Why is there an overall decrease in electron density at the $\pi-$ bonds?
 
user228700
Let me give some context. My textbook has used the following example:
 
user228700
 
user228700
I understand that yes, the electron density in the ring will decrease and there will be a double bond between $C_1$ and the carbon atom of the group attached to $C_1$. Is this all that my textbook is saying or..? Why have they made a generalized statement?
 
In terms of resonance contributors, your textbook is correct. The same explanation using moelcular orbitals is that without the negative hyperconjugation, the electron density wil be mostly in the ring.
But with the negative hyperconjugation, the benzene -C bond will gain a double bond character, meaning there will be increased electron density. Since charge density is conserved, the density must came from somewhere, and thus the electron density in the overall ring (and hence all the pi bonds) decreases
 
user228700
Yes, you have reaffirmed my original statement but my question is whether or not the following general statement is correct:
 
user228700
3:21 AM
8 mins ago, by Kaumudi. H
> "In case of reverse hyperconjugation, there is a decrease in electron density at $\pi-$ bond."
 
Yes that is correct, because electron density end up distributed from the pi MOs to the sigma* MOs of the C-X bonds
 
user228700
:-/ Can you point me to a good source to learn this? I have found no YouTube videos and my textbook doesn't even gloss over this in terms of MOT.
 
although you might have to cherrypick some of the slides, because its coverage include things that re way over your level
However it covers all known hyperconjugation that are relevant to you, thus a very complete overview
Also another helpful advice is that keep in mind that resonance contributors with formal charges does not mean that the atom is charged, it means in the overall MO picture, more (if -) or less (if +) electorn density can be found near that atom
 
Yo @NoiseMaster
I mean @DanielSank
 
Thus to first order (which is the organic chemistry at your level) the resonance contirbutors help map out roughly in the MO picture which atoms have more and which atoms has less electron density and guide how a reaction could occur (e.g. nucloephilic attack etc.)
 
vzn
3:40 AM
@EmilioPisanty plausible; quantum randomness is apparently "easy" to measure in simple circuits, its been done for decades, iirc DS may have posted a link/ ref on that once using resistor etc
 
user228700
@Secret Thanks very much :-)
 
@EmilioPisanty off hand my thought is "absolutely not, this is bs", but I would have to think carefully and revise my knowledge of solid state physics to say for sure.
 
user228700
@JohnR: I've just had breakfast and realized that the amount of vegetables that I ingest in a single day probably outweighs that which you consume in a month.
 
The gaps are big enough that there might be quantumy things going on here...
 
user228700
Proof: For breakfast, I've had chapatis with a side-dish of potatoes, capsicum and peas. For lunch, I shall have rice with sambar made of yet more potatoes, tomatoes and curry leaves, and a side-dish of broad beans. For dinner I won't have any veggies because I will eat dosas with some type of chutney but there you go.
 
user228700
3:59 AM
@Sec: I skimmed through the document and ooh, um, no theory? Example after example...
 
Well, the theory is basically the overlap of sigma/sigma* and pi orbitals
 
user228700
...which is sort of what I was looking for. Dyou know of any sources that deal with this subject at a...lower level?
 
@Kaumudi.H you're comparing a vegetarian to a Brit. I'd say you're right by a fair margin but it's not much of a statement.
 
user228700
@DanielSank No, no, I'm comparing a vegetarian to John Rennie! (who happens to be British)
 
@Kaumudi.H Maybe try this?
 
4:01 AM
But for the vitamin C, potatoes are closer to bread than a vegetable, in my opinion.
 
user228700
Are u saying that my claim that potatoes are vegetables is false? :-o [Bear in mind that my only goal is to make fun of @JohnR :-) ]
 
user228700
@Secret Checking it out now.
 
@Kaumudi.H I'm just being the peanut gallery.
 
user228700
Peanut gallery?
 
user228700
4:11 AM
@Sec: I've watched the first video and have a question.
 
user228700
 
what's the question?
 
Oh boy, @EmilioPisanty there is so much misinformation in that Electrical Engineering post.
 
user228700
When you say ${\pi}^*$ orbital, dyou mean that empty $p-$orbital shown in the screenshot I posted?
 
$\pi^*$ will be formed by two adjacent empty p orbitals of opposite sign put together (e.g. suppose the bottom lobe of the left p orbital is red, then the to of the right p orbital is also red) but otherwise yes, the p orbitals in the video represent the $\pi^8$ orbital that overlaps with the $sigma$ orbitals (which in hybridisation theory, becomes a $sp_n$ shown in the video)
 
user228700
4:22 AM
It was my understanding that these $\pi$ and $\sigma$ orbitals are molecular orbitals. How then can a single atom have these? It looks like that the $p-$orbital in the picture belongs only to the carbon atom and is not involved in hybridization.
 
@EmilioPisanty also, with all those resistors in the circuit, I would have to do a careful analysis to show that the dominant noise source is from the transistors and not Johnson noise from the resistors.
tl,dr: That post is pretty sloppy.
 
@Kaumudi.H The accurate picture is that indeed, these will be replaced by molecular orbitals (or even more accurately, there are no MOs but only a molecular wavefunction that spread through the whole molecule if you are more to the physical chemsitry side of things). However illustrating them this way is not far from accurate as $\pi^*$ are quite localied on the two atoms anyway. Organic chemists tend to do that to make their diagrams simpler
 
The bastard didn't even plot the spectral density. He plotted a time domain trace, so we can't tell whether it's got any coherent peaks.
 
Good Day All
 
Howdy
 
4:25 AM
PSA: Noise is complicated and you can't just wave your hands.
 
user228700
@Secret However, it seems to me that the $p-$ orbital shown is not involved in hybridization!
 
@SirCumference Sup?
 
Nothing, you?
 
Just had breakfast. Gonna hit physics.
 
@Kaumudi.H It cannot be hybridised (hybridisation applies to bonded orbitals and lone pairs only, being part of valence bond theory), The p orbital is vacant
 
user228700
4:29 AM
@Secret Well, then how does the $\pi-$ orbital come into the picture?
 
That comes when you use MO theory instead. Let me see if I can find a MO description somewhere
 
user228700
Okay, thank you :-)
 
@mochacat If you're from the future, what am I going to say next?
 
Ooh, time traveller :P
 
@EmilioPisanty now I'm annoyed. This is going to take a while to analyze and I have other things to do :|
 
user228700
4:34 AM
@Sec: Hmm, I'm starting to wonder whether learning this concept with regard to MOT will be of any use to me now.
 
@DanielSank You still haven't told me whether the t-shirts have to have a physics SE logo on the back
 
Well, VBT should be enough for your level
 
@SirCumference What exactly got you interested in Astrophysics?
 
@SwapnilDas Well, it's the study of the universe. Everything that exists and how it came to be
What else can be more satisfying to know?
 
user228700
@Secret Hmm, okay then. I'll drop it for now. Thanks very much for your help :-) I have another question. May I ask?
 
4:35 AM
True :)
 
and even in my year 3 course, if there are no extended pi systems, (i.e. the p orbital is all by itself due to the moelcule have no conjugation) we just use those VBT diagrams and simplify the pi* to two p orbitals
yup, go ahead
 
user228700
 
user228700
Why doesn't this molecule show cis-tans isomerism?
 
@SirCumference I got interested in physics/ cosmology by a particular documentary.
 
@SwapnilDas Which one?
 
4:38 AM
@SirCumference Ever watched Hawking on Discovery?
 
@SwapnilDas Nope :/
 
@Kaumudi.H It cannot, its symmetric. Try drawing what you think the cis and trans version of it and you will find they are identical
 
user228700
Ah, yes.
 
@SirCumference Ooh,NP. Search : " Did God Create the Universe" by Stephen Hawking
 
@SwapnilDas k
 
user228700
4:41 AM
@Sec: Okay, I think I'm done (for now) Thanks so much _/\ _ :-)
 
ok
 
Last night dream:
 
If something's superior than God in the world, that's Physics. <my view>
 
I have asked a question concerning cosmology where I derived a formula
$$E=\frac{|m|}{r}$$
. The question got a -1 vote.
Johnrennie and a couple user said this question of mine reminds of the thinking of John duffield and that I need to specify what exactly do I meant by dimensions. Meanwhile Acuriousmind said my equation does not even have the correct dimensions thus it does not make sense. Couple of other users then mock about the question in the comments. The next day', I then plan to fix this question. First, in order to get the dimensions right, I add the constant $G_s$ before the frac
 
@Secret -1 for wall
and -2 for me not being in it
 
4:42 AM
@SirCumference have to? No.
 
@DanielSank *should
@Secret Didn't know you liked cosmology :)
 
Whatever you want.
We need more options at this point.
 
Well these are to promote the site, right?
 
We have only two submissions.
 
So I guess it's a given that we should mention the site on there
 
4:43 AM
@SirCumference There is some interest, but often not as much compared to e.g. quantum mechanics and particle physics
 
@SirCumference they're for whatever want.
 
@Secret D:
@DanielSank Huh?
I'm confused, what are these shirts for?
 
@SirCumference fun
 
All right, if you say so...
 
Meanwhile I kinda knew where this dream is inspired from:
1. That Kenshin related discussion and JD related topic
2.
8
A: Can electrons be non-fundamental in higher dimensions?

John RennieParticles are not the fundamental objects that many think. Our best current description of particles is quantum field theory, and this describes particles as excitations in the modes described by the (asymptotically free) quantum field. We regard the quantum field as fundamental, and the existenc...

which for some reason I think I have seen this questio pop up 3 times in the chat yesterday
 
4:47 AM
@DanielSank All right, it's up
 
3.
This is really to broad a question - it's not clear why exactly you think that the extra dimensions make a fundamental particle composite, and it's also not clear whether string theory where the particles become different states of the fundamental string qualifies as such a theory or not (because the state isn't really "made out" of anything). — ACuriousMind ♦ 15 hours ago
somehow acuriousmind's comment here become johnrennie's comment in the dream
and 4.
that debunked BICEP2 polarisation diagram
Before I woke up, I thoguht I really have asked such a bad question, and I planned to fix it, only when I woke up completely did I realise I have not post any question of such nature
 
5:02 AM
@DanielSank you don't have to, you know. It's interesting but in-depth analysis of random internet stuff for random internet people is not something that people normally get paid for.
 
@DanielSank Yeah, I expected a downvote. Pretty sure my idea isn't what was intended.
 
user228700
5:39 AM
@Kenshin: No, we don't celebrate on New Years' eve. Well, several people do, by drinking themselves blind and partying in clubs here but in the first place I am not interested in drinking alcohol and secondly, even if I were interested, I am not old enough to drink legally. Some families organize parties in their apartments but not where I live anyway. Besides, family parties with the neighbours are terribly dry.
 
user228700
I have spent these past few New Years' eves at home, watching a movie or something with my family. Since I go to bed at around 9:00 PM everyday, this year, I will be in bed at 12:00 :-) @Kenshin: What about you?
 
user228700
(I have only just realized how pathetic this probably sounds :-P)
 
user228700
@JohnR: Hi, morning :-)
 
Morning :-)
 
user228700
@JohnRennie Will u be around for long today?
 
5:55 AM
Yes, I'll be around until midday (UTC) as usual - that's, gosh, 6 hours. I spend sooooo much of my life on this site :-)
 
user228700
:-) Yep. Okay, thanks.
 
And FYI I had a stir fry last night with lots of vegetables! And a bit of meat :-)
Well, quite a lot of meat actually ...
 
user228700
I see. Good for you! :-P
 
user228700
(I'm going to attribute that to the fact that you're staying with your mum now :-P)
 
Correct! :-)
 
user228700
6:00 AM
Aha! :-D
 
But it was a very nice meal and I might actually consider making it for myself when I get home ...
 
user228700
(Y) :-)
 
I've also eaten large amounts of pumpkin pie and carrot cake - they're vegetables :-)
 
user228700
Hmph. That just barely counts.
 
I thought pumpkin's a fruit?
 
user228700
6:06 AM
Huh? I've always thought of pumpkin as being a vegetable.
 
Though I'm not a botanist
 
we have to calculate Kb for B(OH)4– , Ka (B(OH)3) = 6 × 10^(–10)
 
@Kaumudi.H Just checked. It has seeds, and any part of the plant containing seeds is a fruit
Any part not containing seeds is a vegetable
 
Can annybody help me in this
 
Cool to know
 
user228700
6:08 AM
@SirCumference Yeah, thanks for sharing. I couldn't be bothered to Google it :-P Trying to finish making notes...
 
@JohnRennie do you have any idea about that
 
user228700
Henry Reich (a.k.a the creator of that ^ video) is the reason I'm sitting here, doing Organic effing Chemistry right now, but I couldn't be more grateful.
 
Oh, he's good, that's for sure
but I think this is the best I've seen by him
it's an outstanding piece of science communication
 
@Kaumudi.H yes I'll be looking at fireworks
i'm not a fan of the drink much either
but I do enjoy welcoming the new year
but not by drinking heavily
hi @JohnRennie
 
6:21 AM
Morning
 
@JohnRennie evening
 
@EmilioPisanty Evening? I thought you were in Italy. Or do I mean Spain? Anyway Europe somewhere?
 
@JohnRennie Italy or Spain? Where'd those come from?
I'm based in Berlin at the moment, but I'm currently home in Mexico for the holidays
 
Ah. Germany. Well it is Europe somewhere :-) I'd missed the fact you'd gone back to Mexico for the holiday.
 
user228700
6:27 AM
@EmilioPisanty If it's that good, I'm pretty sure that I won't be able to understand it. I'll watch it in awhile anyway :-P
 
@JohnRennie don't think I'd mentioned it previously.
 
user228700
@Kenshin Ah, I see :-)
 
The nearest I got to working in Germany was a very brief spell in Düsseldorf. And I've never even been to Mexico :-(
 
@JohnRennie you should go ;-). Both to Berlin and to Mexico.
 
user228700
@JohnRennie -__- I've never been outside the South of the South of India, let alone my country!
 
6:30 AM
Or, failing that, to Swale (which video is another box stuffed with Britishness, btw).
 
@JohnRennie what is the best goal for a human?
 
user228700
@Kenshin Wow, that got real deep real quick :-P
 
user228700
@Kenshin I like this, thanks for sharing! :-D
 
np i just discovered that tune today
@Kaumudi.H I need to invent a new year's resolution
but not sure what goal to have
 
user228700
It's...not the type of thing I usually listen to but once in awhile, I get addicted to something like this and then a few days later, I will punch you in the face if you make me listen to it again :-P
 
user228700
6:38 AM
@Kenshin Ah, you're into new year's resolutions?
 
lol
@Kaumudi.H if i can find a good goal then yeah
 
user228700
I see :-)
 
but like once ur rich and famous and achieved all ur goals, wat theN?
 
user228700
x'D Uh huh.
 
@EmilioPisanty so now I know all about Swale. That's 10 minutes of my life I won't get back :-)
 
user228700
6:41 AM
x'D
 
@JohnRennie the video is just so ridiculously British
in, like, the everyday sort of stuff
you probably don't notice
 
Really? I'd have guessed all nations have their eccentricities. The details may vary but homo sapiens is an inescapably daft species :-)
And long may it remain so :-)
 
user228700
@JohnR: Have u no advice for Mr. Rich and Famous
 
Mr. Rich and Famous ???
 
user228700
@Ken is a self-proclaimed (Well, we can't be sure so) Rich and Famous person from Australia :-P
 
6:47 AM
Oh, the discussion about goals.
When you're young you think you need goals to be happy. When you get older you'll discover the secret to being happy is, well, just being happy. Bugger the goals :-)
 
user228700
> "...you think you need goals to be happy"
 
user228700
What dyou mean?
 
It's the delusion that the road to happiness is achieving your ambitions.
 
user228700
Oh, right. Delusion?!
 
If you do achieve your ambitions you'll find you feel exactly the same as you do now. No happier and no sadder.
 
user228700
6:50 AM
> "Just be happy"
 
user228700
And how does one go about doing that? (:-P)
 
Most of what affects us every day are little things. Running out of milk when you want your breakfast coffee, or find a coin that someone has dropped.
Appreciating the everyday little things is where happiness lies. Or contentment anyway.
 
user228700
:-) In these past 5 months, I have found that to be very true.
 
To be fair people who achieve great things often do so because they are discontented. If everyone took my position we'd still be living in caves hiding from lions.
 
user228700
Haha, yes, that is also true, but I want to do stuff not to find some form of joy that evades me now. I want to do stuff to do stuff.
 
6:54 AM
So it's probably good to be discontented when you're young. I think I was. But eventually you snap out of it :-)
 
Witty devil: What if I nuke the 2AB term from existence...?
 
user228700
Then again, I'm all screwed up right now so it's better I don't make any swooping statements just now :-P
 
ME: Then you will have no quanutm mechanics since there will be no interference
 
user228700
Lunch time!
 
In an attempt to increase my happiness I'm about to eat another slice of my Mum's carrot cake :-)
 

« first day (2248 days earlier)      last day (2695 days later) »