The h Bar

12:06 AM

@knzhou Here's an answer to your question about coherent states. If anything isn't clear, please let me know so that we can work towards a good answer.

heather

12:36 AM

would someone mind taking a look at the result of a calculation of mine as a sanity check?

i'm considering a 1 mW laser, with a wavelength of 515 nm. would the output of photons per second be $2.5925701 \times 10^{15}$?

and, if I put a filter of 5 OD in front, would that reduce the output of photons to 25925701000 per second?

dmckee

1:05 AM

very approximately 2 eV per photon (because 500ish nm is greenish and visible light is one to a few eV)

$6 \times 10^{15} eV/s$ (because 1 eV is $1.6 \times 10^{-19} \,\mathrm{J}$ and a mW is $10^{-3}\,\mathrm{J/s}$)

so $2 \times 10^{15}/s$ is reasonable at an order of magnitude level

No idea what 5 OD is right off, and besides, I'm not counting places in "25925701000".

0celo7

@BernardoMeurer

21 Savage talks dating Amber Rose, ISSA the album, Jay-Z's new album, & much more

►

Las Vegas Raiders

3:45 AM

He's no 50 Cent. More like his two bit half brother.

yuggib

8:04 AM

@LasVegasRaiders o/

Just win baby

8:22 AM

\o how's it going? @yuggib

Pritt Balagopal

Greetings H bar

I had recently posted an answer, only to realize the question was asked a year ago.

Can someone please review my answer and see if it's good for SE or not?

1

Q: Pressure in fluids at a height/depth

How can we prove that pressure in a system will be same in a particular fluid for the same height? Eg. in a hydraulic lift, and something even more complicated than that, can we always say that pressure at same height will be same. Imagine a random container which bends like a sine wave. So will ...

newtonian-mechanics

Slereah

9:21 AM

Original Takes for Orson Welles Wine Commercial

►

Aaaah the French

Shing

@PrittBalagopal I think you can delete your own answer?

Pritt Balagopal

@Shing I don't want to delete it.

I've spent quite a lot of time to write it.

Shing

@PrittBalagopal ohh I see what you were asking

it is completely cool

Pritt Balagopal

I simply want other users to share the view on that answer.

user228700

@JohnR: Morning :-)

Shing

9:26 AM

@Danu Happy b-day! sorry for being late a bit

John Rennie

@Kaumudi.H Morning

(Afternoon in Thrissur!)

user228700

@JohnRennie But I'm back home in Chennai!

Pritt Balagopal

Good morning everyone! (its afternoon here)

And I'm in Hosur!

Avantgarde

Chennai...

Pritt Balagopal

Wow, lots of people in TN huh?

John Rennie

9:27 AM

@Kaumudi.H Ah. Good journey back?

@PrittBalagopal TN?

Avantgarde

Now I want some good idli sambar...

user228700

@JohnRennie Yeah! :-) I thought I'd told you; my train arrived yesterday morning!

user228700

@JohnRennie Tamil Nadu.

John Rennie

@Kaumudi.H ah, of course.

Pritt Balagopal

Oh, sorry @JohnRennie, I don't hope I alienated you by talking about our region?

user228700

9:29 AM

@JohnR: Dunno if u noticed but I deleted my account on Fb.

John Rennie

@Avantgarde I thought we had already established that idli is basically devoid of both taste and texture :-)

Pritt Balagopal

Anyway TN is Tamil Nadu, a state in India where I live.

John Rennie

@PrittBalagopal: no, you haven't upset me :-) I was just curious. It was obvious you were from India and I was just curious what TN meant. But I should have guessed it meant Tamil Nadu.

user228700

@JohnRennie Shhhhhh. Idli enthusiasts will murder you.

Pritt Balagopal

Gotta go guys, Ta Ta

John Rennie

9:31 AM

@Kaumudi.H: you probably did tell me you had got back from the MEC visit and I forgot.

user228700

Yep.

John Rennie

Why did you delete your Facebook account? That didn't last long!

user228700

1 sec.

Avantgarde

@JohnRennie I get that it does not give a splash of strong tastes inside your mouth, but I love some good idli, particularly the ones made from semolina in contrast with the ones made from rice. You get the splash from sambar ;)

John Rennie

@Avantgarde idli made from semolina sounds awfully like the Italian gnocchi

Avantgarde

9:34 AM

@JohnRennie I have never had gnocchi, so I can't say anything there

John Rennie

And I'm very fond of gnocchi, though I usually spice up the semolina e.g. by adding chopped chillis to it.

Avantgarde

Hm, I'd do that too.

user228700

@JohnR: Sorry about that, I was eating chocolate again.

John Rennie

@Kaumudi.H prioritising the critical tasks first eh :-)

user228700

Always :-) (:-P)

user228700

9:39 AM

Right, well, it has been only 16 hours since I created my account and I've already gotten 9 friend requests!

Las Vegas Raiders

@Slereah do you follow the Tour de France?

Slereah

No

user228700

...and if I accept one of the requests, other people will see it on their timeline and they'll send me one and it's exponential, the whole thing.

Avantgarde

You don't have to accept requests if you don't want to

You're too nice?

user228700

I, well, I'd like them to believe that I am not a freak who denies requests for no fault of their own, so too nice would be the apt term to use, I s'pose.

John Rennie

9:42 AM

You can just delete the friend requests. The person sending the request doesn't get notified, so it's not as if you're telling them to bog off.

Avantgarde

Don't deny. Just leave them hanging :P

Balarka Sen

facebook is a technological madness

Las Vegas Raiders

form of, yeah

ACuriousMind

@JohnRennie If they're people you regularly run into in real life, it is telling them to bog off and they will ask you whether you saw their friend request :P

John Rennie

@Kaumudi.H: I saw that you had friended MEC. When you do that all MECs existing friends can see it and a significant percentage of them will send friend requests to you in response.

user228700

9:43 AM

@JohnRennie Right, right. It's alright, I'd rather not be on there at all.

Avantgarde

@JohnRennie Have you ever had gol gappa?

ACuriousMind

Alas, if it's people you don't actually know that well, just declining the requests does no harm indeed.

user228700

@JohnRennie Ah, hmm, well, none of the friend requests I had received until I deleted it were from future classmates/college mates.

John Rennie

@ACuriousMind I must admit I have run into this problem. I tend to accept the friend request, leave it a couple of weeks then quietly unfriend them :-)

Las Vegas Raiders

defriend?

:P

John Rennie

9:46 AM

@Avantgarde I've eaten puris. In fact I've made puris myself (which isn't a great accomplishment). But I've never eaten them stuffed with gram flour and mashed potato.

user228700

No, no, golgappas aren't puris!

Avantgarde

@JohnRennie God you should try that, if you like spicy stuff. And it's not really puri, like Kaumudi said.

user228700

...oh, right, they are, but not the kind of puris I know.

John Rennie

Googling gol gappa takes me to:

Panipuri

Panipuri ( pānīpūrī ) is a common street snack in several regions of the Indian subcontinent. In East India, it is misidentified with Phuchhka which is very different from Panipuri. The Puchhka (also called so in Bangladesh) differs greatly in terms of content and taste. Puchkas use a mixture of boiled gram and mashed potatoes as the filling and is tangy rather than sweetish while the water is sour and spicy. Puchkas are also slightly bigger in size and the puris are darker in colour. In North India, it is called Golgappa, In madhaya pradesh It is called Fulki, In Andhra Pradesh and Telangana its...

Avantgarde

Puris are bread, and are soft. The 'puri' in gol gappa is hard. You see those balls there? They're hard. (This is a weird sounding sentence, I know, but it's done now)

user228700

9:48 AM

@JohnRennie That's the one.

user228700

@Avantgarde Oh, geez x'D

John Rennie

The way I was taught to make puris you roll out little triangles of the dough and drop them into hot fat. They swell up and go crisp.

They end up looking very like the ones in that Wikipedia article.

Balarka Sen

@Avantgarde That's serious r/nocontext material, that

Avantgarde

:P

You made these?

John Rennie

Yes.

Avantgarde

9:51 AM

They can be crispy, but they're still bread, right?

John Rennie

Though I think the flour I was taught to use was slightly darker than that ...

Avantgarde

Yeah, there can be variation. The ones in 'gol gappa' are crispy enough to break apart easily. They're basically chips in a spherical shape

Can't wait to have lunch. All this..

John Rennie

Indeed. I'm having pizza for lunch today. Not especially Indian, but very nice.

But that isn't for a few hours yet ...

Avantgarde

Nice. What are some particularly British toppings on pizza?

John Rennie

We put pretty much anything on pizza. Today I'm having two different pizzas, one with barbecue chicken and one with a mixture of diffrent meats.

Avantgarde

9:59 AM

Sounds good

ACuriousMind

Transmittance is the right sort of value, but you'd want it to not have a "luminous" in front. Ideal would be if they gave you the spectral transmittance function.

Danu

10:17 AM

@Shing Thanks, it's really no problem ;)

Mostafa

11:37 AM

Question: if two operators commute (commutator being zero), are they still restricted by the uncertainty principle?

0celo7

@Mostafa No.

You can simultaneously diagonalize them.

AHB

12:09 PM

Hello all

I got a quick question. give me a hint.

In some cases, if the charge density (volume charge density) does not shrink to zero fast enough, then we cannot define electric field because the integral diverges.

ACuriousMind

> 11. Page, D.N.: Private communication

Arrrrrrrrrgh

Avantgarde

haha

which paper are you looking at?

ACuriousMind

That is the reference of a paper for a formula which another paper referenced that paper for.

So in the end, the "reference" for this formula is "D.N. Page may or may not have correctly computed it".

AHB

If we exclude such charge distributions, there may still be some points on which you cannot define electric field! because at that point the integrand is undefined.

What constraint should be put on the charge density so that these problems don't arise?

ACuriousMind

@AHB Why would the integrand be undefined?

AHB

12:16 PM

@ACuriousMind like I(1/x;0,1).

at the point x=0, the integrand is infinity.

AND!

it is not possible to take the integral and later take the limit for the lower limit toward zero.

ACuriousMind

I'm not sure what I(1/x;0,1) means, but if you're thinking of point charges, then you're right that you can't define the electric field at the location of a point charge

That's...not a problem.

AHB

I(f(x);L-,L+)

The definite integral of f(x) from L- to L+

ACuriousMind

...why don't you write $\int^b_a f(x)\mathrm{d}x$ like everyone else? (You know you can use MathJax in chat, right?)

AHB

@ACuriousMind so why would we be able to define it if it was not a point charge?

@ACuriousMind really?? I can't see what you typed right now.

ACuriousMind

@AHB Look in the upper right corner of the chat room...

(unless you're on mobile)

AHB

12:19 PM

fortunately I am not.

But I can read mathjax as it is. so that is ok.

So what about a smooth $\rho$?

Why do we say we can define electric field in that case? but not in the case of a point charge?

ACuriousMind

Well, for a smooth $\rho$ you just solve Maxwell's equations

AHB

hmmm. I am trying to build up the bricks of the electrostatics from the beginning.

So I have, currently, coulombs (mistyped?) law and that $\mathbf{E}=-\nabla\phi$

@ACuriousMind which equation do I need? for this specific thing?

ACuriousMind

@AHB If you're doing electrostatics, then $j= 0$ and $B=0$ and you just get Gauß' law $\nabla\cdot E = \rho$ and irrotationality of the electric field $\nabla\times E = 0$ The latter is equivalent to $E = -\nabla \phi$, so it all reduces to solving Poisson's equation $ - \nabla^2 \phi = \rho$.

0celo7

@ACuriousMind how do people not see this

@BernardoMeurer my coworker thought Quavo was the only Migo

AHB

@0celo7 I had seen this before.

But didn't succeed installing it. I am trying right now...

ACuriousMind

12:26 PM

@0celo7 Quavo is an alien fungus?

0celo7

@ACuriousMind No, his a member of the Gwinnett County Savages

Literally the hottest artists on the planet rn

Under what rock are you living?

Sid

Those are the names of bands?

Alien fungus? County Savages?

Ew

Bernardo Meurer

@0celo7 lol

When do I need to make Dioptas work?

I have the script

0celo7

@BernardoMeurer Idk, lemme ask when Raul is gonna get here

Bernardo Meurer

Who the hell's Raul

0celo7

12:32 PM

The guy whose mac we're using

@ACuriousMind Halp!

TeX is asking me for a .cls file

I have the file, just not sure how to give it to TeX

I can't figure out where it is searching for the file.

ACuriousMind

I don't even know what a .cls file is, nor why TeX would ask for it

0celo7

@ACuriousMind I'm using a template

Secret

12:56 PM

Ok, so I have finished reading that paper Emilo referred to me roughly 4 days ago.

arxiv.org/abs/1111.3328

I still don't quite agree one thing about their analysis: For the case where $\lambda$ is taken form the overlap region, they said it will correspond to one of the 4 product states formed by $\{\lvert 0\rangle,\lvert +\rangle\}$. How do they rule out that since the overall outcome is comptaible to 4 different cases, that we cannot interpret it as a mixed state instead. If it is a mixed state, then the probability zero problem will be avoided

My argument on that is if the physical state is taken from the overlap region, which means we cannot really distinguish between which of the 4 initial states are prepared by the two independent sources, what stops the interpretation to be a mixed state made of the 4 product states as you still won't get any correlation from that?

e.g. it could well be the mixed state $$\sum_{(a,b)\in \{+,0\}}\frac{1}{4}\lvert a\rangle\langle b\rvert$$

That is, if the measurement is uncertain on which preparation is done, then it will mean there is incomplete information and we should interpret that conflicting case the mixed state which the most uniform probability distribution?

0celo7

1:15 PM

@ACuriousMind Is O'Dimm Satan?

ACuriousMind

1:39 PM

@0celo7 Perhaps

0celo7

@ACuriousMind What kind of answer is that?

@ACuriousMind They have saints in Toussaint. Is Catholicism a religion in the Witcher universe?

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 Well, Toussiant is the French name for All Saints' Eve, so I think the allusions are not accidental, but I don't think any form of the Christian religion as such exists in the Witcher's universe

0celo7

reddit.com/r/TrueChristian/comments/4m986f/…

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 As above, I don't think "Satan" as a concept exists in the Witcher's world, but again, him being presented as a sort-of diabolical archetype is certainly not accidental. There are probably enough folk stories about "deals with the devil" that are not explicitly Christian so that he doesn't need to be Satan for that to work

0celo7

@ACuriousMind lol

@ACuriousMind I don't exactly understand his powers.

It seems like he has to make a deal with Geralt, but he killed the old man without a deal

So he can kill indiscriminately...why doesn't he just kill Geralt and Olgierd?

It doesn't make sense that Satan/Satan's clone would hold himself to a deal like that

ACuriousMind

1:50 PM

@0celo7 I think you're not supposed to - O'Dimm is far out of Geralt's league, and I think O'Dimm sticks to deals more out of amusement than necessity

0celo7

@ACuriousMind So is O'Dimm more powerful than the Hunt?

I'm very confused by the Hunt too...all-powerful specters that can be defeated in a sword fight

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 I'd say so, yes - that the end of the day, the Hunt is just a bunch of very powerful Elven mages, while whatever O'Dimm does, it's not the magic mortals practice

0celo7

So why do the Hunt never use magic?

We know that the Aen Elle have extremely powerful battle magic...Avellach takes out a whole damn forest.

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 They do - the navigators are their mages

The ordinary "foot soldier" from the hunt is probably not skiled in magic at all

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Ok, and Carantheir (can't spell) never uses magic

Ciri breaks his staff, then it's just a fight with Geralt

is Eredin not a mage?

ACuriousMind

1:54 PM

@0celo7 I don't think so, at least not any more than Geralt is - a few magic tricks, but not more

@0celo7 Doesn't he? I seem to recall the teleports, bombards you with ice shards, etc...

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret You can disagree with the interpretation of that paper, but saying that you disagree with the math there is like disagreeing with the math of Bell's theorem. That paper has had enough exposure (i.e. enough eyeballs examining it critically) that you can assume that all the math is correct.

Mostafa

@0celo7 OK.

where $[\hat \Omega , \hat \Lambda ]= i\Gamma $ and $\hat X = X-\langle X\rangle $

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret on this count, presumably you mean $$\rho=\sum_{a,b\in\{0,+\}} \frac14 |a\rangle\langle a| \otimes |b\rangle\langle b|.$$ Your version is a pure state.

(And, if I may: this is the kind of elementary mistake that makes it very hard to take any surrounding argumentation seriously.)

That said, you're on pretty subtle ground there

Mostafa

@0celo7 This requires the anticommutator to be zero too to lift the restriction (of the uncertainty principle)

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret For that specific $\lambda$, yes, the ontic state is indeed consistent with any mixed state formed of convex combinations of the $|a\rangle\langle a| \otimes |b\rangle\langle b|$ for $a,b\in\{0,+\}$.

ACuriousMind

2:03 PM

@Mostafa So, uh, what was your question exactly if you were referring to that form of the uncertainty principle?

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Yeah, but not at the level of Yen or Avellac'h

Emilio Pisanty

However, you can only ever ensure that you've got one of those $\lambda$s in the support intersection $\Delta$ if you've got a single copy of the state, and it is impossible to fully assign a state to a single copy, so ultimately the question is meaningless in several ways.

0celo7

If Yen was the main villain, all hope would be lost

if any of the Lodge sorceresses were the villains, all hope would be lost

I'l just saying that the Hunt are an underwhelming villain

Emilio Pisanty

Your analysis needs to work for $\lambda$ running over the full support of the $\mu_i(\lambda)$, and it cannot depend on variables (i.e. the $\lambda$) to which we don't have access

Mostafa

@ACuriousMind Intuitively I don't understand the meaning of thsi general uncertainty principle. If the commutator is zero, then we can have a simultaneous eigenbasis for the two (Hermitian) operators. Why do we still have $\Delta \Omega \Delta \Lambda >0$ ?

ACuriousMind

2:07 PM

@Mostafa Because if your system is not in one of the simultaneous eigenstates, then the uncertainties are non-zero.

Note that you don't have $> 0$, but only $\geq 0$ - in a simultaneous eigenstate, the first term vanishes, too.

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret And on this: no. You have a (choice of) definite preparation procedures, and there's a wide array of tools that can confirm that they produce what QM calls a pure state. What you're saying amounts to positing "... but in this weird corner case, QM actually flips out and changes its behaviour".

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 I think one possible explanation would be that navigation takes up most of their resources, leaving them much less reserves available for battle magic. Another might be that the Hunt is indeed not as powerful as it is made out to be - they live from their reputation (the depopulated villages, the scary armor), not their actual prowess.

Mostafa

@ACuriousMind I'm not sure what you mean by this. When we measure the first variable, the second will be determined if the commutator is zero. Is this wrong?

ACuriousMind

@Mostafa Yes, that's wrong

Mostafa

@ACuriousMind Doesn't the wavefunction collapse to one of the eigenkets when measured?

0celo7

2:13 PM

@ACuriousMind Either of those seem reasonable.

@ACuriousMind I take the Hunt to be scarier looking Thalmor.

Elven Supremacists that want to take over the human world

Secret

Wow, did I really implied all these strong points. I thought my argument is only based on me being confused on why I cannot have a mixed state. In fact, I have checked the maths, they are all fine, it is that particular point that makes me wonder how they from from one step of the maths to another and I thought they have not took account of the mixed state.

But I think I understood it now. We don't have access to the full probability distribution where $\lambda$ is taken from, which is why we can say it can only be one of the 4 cases

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret You cannot have a mixed state because you prepared a pure state.

Mostafa

@ACuriousMind I always happily thought this is the only thing I knew from QM. IS THIS WRONG??

ACuriousMind

@Mostafa So? 1. Take $L^2$ and $L_z$ -they commute, but measuring $L^2$ on the superposition of a spin-up and spin-down state will not collapse the state to an eigenstate of $L_z$, since that state is already an eigenstate of $L^2$. So you don't determine $L_z$ by measuring $L^2$ 2. The uncertainties are not statements about consecutive measurements. If you are in a state that's not an eigenstate of either observable, both uncertainties are non-zero, whether the observables commute or not.

Emilio Pisanty

You can't randomly assume that your preparation procedure bugs out when you find it convenient

Secret

2:17 PM

I thought we can only infer indirectly about the state via the probability distribution of observables obtained from the measurement, and totally forgot that we can experimentally check whether a state is pure

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 Actually, they don't want to take over the world. Their main purpose is to bring back resources and slaves to Tir na Lia.

0celo7

@ACuriousMind For $\gamma:S^1\to R^2$ a smooth plane curve, why would $S(\theta)=(\gamma(\theta),(\cos\theta,\sin\theta))$ be the "support function?"

Secret

Had I realised that earlier, I think my arugment will be explained without being posted. I should be more careful next time when I analyse something

It seems I knew very little on how experimental quantum physics works...

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Enslaving = take over

Although the Thalmor's end goal is to end the world, isn't it

@ACuriousMind What is the White Frost, anyway

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret if you think the PBR paper is experimental physics, you should really start visiting some actual labs

0celo7

2:20 PM

polishes a ceramic

what's a quantum mechanic

Secret

No, I mean things like when you said you have a lot of procedures to check whether a state is pure, as well the many things you have used to show why my argument falls apart

Emilio Pisanty

@0celo7 I'm a quantum mechanic. And I've got the shirt to prove it.

Secret

But I do agree, I really need to take a visit to a quantum lab, I know so little on how the experiments were done, especially what tools that are in the theory can be implemented experimentally

Mostafa

@ACuriousMind the 1st point is probably because $L^2$ is degenerate (haven't studied angular momentum yet).

But your 2nd point....you're right. I don't know why did I assume that meaning for the uncertainty relation :\

ACuriousMind

@Mostafa It is, yes

0celo7

2:22 PM

@BernardoMeurer What is it exactly you wanted to talk about? No one is at work today it seems

So no guinea pigs

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 The end of the world

Bernardo Meurer

@0celo7 I wanted to test it

0celo7

@BernardoMeurer Raul said he got it to work, but I think Will and Jacob need it

Bernardo Meurer

Dope

0celo7

I'm super busy Monday, at an accelerator Tuesday, so...Wednesday?

Mostafa

2:24 PM

"in a simultaneous eigenstate, the first term vanishes, too"
Did you mean the anti-commutator term?

Bernardo Meurer

@0celo7 Sure, I'll be in BR

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret It doesn't directly or fully apply to your case, but it's probably worth your time to read this answer

147

Q: I believe I have solved a famous open problem. How do I convince people in the field that I am not a crank?

I am interested in the situation where you have a very interesting result. For instance, you have solved a very important open problem. However, you are not known in the field and do not have any remarkable publications. Your supervisor thinks the work is good and you submit the work to a high pr...

publications paper-submission

Bernardo Meurer

Get me fridge magnets dawg

0celo7

@BernardoMeurer I'm so sorry, I forgot to get a Chiraq magnet :(

Bernardo Meurer

@0celo7 Yeah dude, cold hearted

I need my magnets

0celo7

2:25 PM

I was going to get one, but then some dude died and I was one of those assholes who look

Emilio Pisanty

Particularly on the aspects of the importance of going over the small stuff, the impact of minor mistakes, and the reasons people can have for being reluctant to engage

0celo7

Forgot all about it

@ACuriousMind You didn't answer my question above...

Emilio Pisanty

(dammit. This answer to that question.)

Mostafa

@ACuriousMind Why do we have the well-known form of the uncertainty principle then? It is not the most general relation (and can be incorrect sometimes).

0celo7

@Mostafa it's usually always wrong

The domains of the operators need not be the same

There are states whose momentum but not position is defined, and vice versa

Mostafa

2:33 PM

@0celo7 assuming the domains are the same

wait

It is not wrong, it's just inaccurate

because the first term is always positive

0celo7

And the domain of XP is not the same as for PX

Lots of subtle issues

Mostafa

What does the anti-commutator being zero mean?

Emilio Pisanty

@Mostafa that the operators anticommute

Mostafa

:)

Secret

(Is currently reading, but I also want to clarify something)
Knowing how dangerous to one's future of getting the reputation of being a crank is, "claiming to have a solution for a famous open problem " is never something I have in mind. I often just thought something along the lines with "hmm, this is strange, this argument does not make sense to me, what am I missing in order for it to make sense?"

I tend to avoid challenge something that I don't fully understood (in order to minimise the chance of being mistakenly labelled crank and thus destroying my future), so even if it sounds like …

Mostafa

2:36 PM

@EmilioPisanty For the commutator case, there's an intuitive explanation (existence of at least one simultaneous eigenbasis). I'm looking for something similar

Emilio Pisanty

@Mostafa it's usually indicative of some sort of fermionic behaviour

Secret

> It is often impossible to satisfy him.
Because of the points mentioned above, he often insists on the validity of his claim even after she tells him it is not. At other times where he understands the reply he considers it a simple easy-to-fix error, not a fundamental one. He tries to fix it and get her verify it. This leads to back and forth.

Mostafa

@EmilioPisanty Ok I'll come back to it in a few days (just started Chapter10 of Shankar- systems with N degrees of freedom)

Emilio Pisanty

@Secret as feedback ─ this was precisely what "I disagree with their analysis" above did not sound like.

Secret

Yeah, I should not have used such strong tone, that's really not how I comment on things

I have to be more careful (while at the same time ensure all my careless mistakes are ironed out before posting the question)

Emilio Pisanty

2:45 PM

@Secret and yeah, one of my minor (micro) gripes with that answer is that it underplays just how much a factor that is. "Will engaging in this exchange lead to unstoppable back-and-forth that I will be unable to disengage from?" is a huge part of weighing whether to reply or not.

Mostafa

I'm clearly at that stage of learning (QM) that ask a lot of questions: lots of which are just wrong, many are not important, others are too broad and mathematically complicated without being really useful to understanding the subject.

Secret

For me to safeguard myself on insisting the validaty of the claim (one of the hallmarks of cranks), I often tend to formulate my questions in a way to debunk my own argument, or put it in more impolite terms, belief.

This is why 90% of my questions often have some phrase that looks like "why is A (stuff that is concluded from said belief) impossible, how is it ruled out)"

Because I am never knowledgeable enough to challenge other people, it means that once I understood why A is impossible, the argument will quickly fall apart.

> He underestimates the required time and effort on her part to answer his claim.
He thinks it is a simple easy job for her to answer his claim. E.g. he expects her to give him a counterexample where his algorithm fails. Finding a counterexample for an algorithm is a very difficult task (as anyone who has marked undergraduate algorithms or complexity theory assignments would know). Finding an explanation why an idea is fundamentally flawed and cannot work is even more difficult.

In general, the answer to "why A is impossible" (which is really the gist to destroy a pet theory, so to speak) is often very difficult to obtain, no matter how hard I try to sharpen my question asking skills (I once almost get into argument with one of my professors because we failed to find the answer to this thus destroy my pet theory)

Mostafa

@AHB see this

Just bookmark the link "start ChatJax" in that page

Secret

What it is true that most people tend to say my questions are sharp, they are really that partly because I have a lot of pet theories and I know I must destory them to keep my future safe

(However they may not look really sharp on SE because of careless mistakes and my poor presentation skills, I am still improving on that area)

> You will not get more than one chance.
Make it count. If on the first page of your paper she finds a silly mistake or a basic error (e.g. you do not even know the definitions of P and NP) then she will be done with your claims forever.

That reminds me how I got question permabanned last year by one professor of mine

and the reason, I suspect is me keep talking about a pet theory of mine called the marble experiment. It takes a year later before that is shattered forever

Your marble experiment does not violate Bell's Theorem (or any other theorem of classical probability) and is therefore quite entirely irrelevant to the issue here. The wave function does not count as a hidden variable because it cannot *determinstically predict the outcomes of all measurements. In your marble experiment, we can easily explain the result by invoking some determinstic (though mysterious) force. — WillO Apr 29 at 15:47

I think, perhaps if I stop overlooking small details, I might be better at debunking my own pet theories which is constantly bothering me with questions

> Recheck your solution.
Put your proof aside completely for two weeks or more. Do not think about it. Then go back and recheck it with a fresh mind as if you were checking someone else's solution.

Hmm, I never tried that before, "putting aside your own work for a week before looking at it again"

maybe that will help me to spot my own careless mistakes

> Make sure every detail in your paper is correct.
Follow the standard structure of papers in the topic. Check a few famous well-written papers in the area that have solved major open problems. All definitions should be clear, easy to understand, and rigorous. Every theorem (lemma, etc.) should be clearly and rigorously stated, and the proof of each of them should follow their statement. She should be able to see why each claim in the proof is correct based on the previous steps, definitions, and lemmas without too much trouble. If you fail the reader is not likely to continue reading.

I suspect this block is what you want me to look it

ACuriousMind

3:09 PM

@Secret I suspect the goal was that you read that post and think about how it might apply to you, not to let us participate in your stream-of-consciousness while reading it.

Emilio Pisanty

^

ACuriousMind

This is still a chat, not a diary or blog.

AccidentalFourierTransform

3:51 PM

@Secret why are you always so hard on yourself?

Secret

It's not hard, it's sufficiently backed claim. Ask Emilo, Acuriousmind, and many other SE users, it is often very difficult to understand my questions because of hte huge number of careless mistakes, misplaced concepts and misjudgements in them

In general, I rarely be hard on myself nor praise myself. Should I do so (modulo some instance of carelessness) there is often at least 6 months of ancedote and sometimes data to back it up

This is one reason when I speak, I never speak in a 100% certain tone, cause I have a lot more need to learn

Perhaps one thing that defines my thinking, is I tend to consider emotions as a burden to rational thinking, which is quite ironic because I felt a lot of vigorous emotions all the time

In a more reductive sense, I am more like a learning machine than a person, with the main goal to understand why and how things happen in the world. In doing so, I often found a lot of customs and social politness very inefficient and I occassionally ran into trouble with other people because of my disregard of these conventions

(And as you have noticed, I tend to analyse myself alot, because frankly, I cannot say I really understood what I am doing, even though I think I know what I am doing)

Transcript for