Interestingly, when Newton published his Universal Gravitation theory, it was considered as spooky as quantum physics is nowadays. It broke away with the Mechanical philosophy of the day that saw the natural world as a series of direct cause-effect interactions. Even Newton disliked the implications of UG and tried to make them for, unsuccessfully, into Mechanical philosophy.
Well given that I remember my professors barely knew how to code when they were the ones teaching us, I’m never surprised computational papers are like this…
That’s what you get when people never learn alternatives to MacOS or Windows
Srinivasa Ramanujan was an Indian mathematician who worked on number theory, infinite series and analysis. He said that he would have dreams of drops of blood (a symbol of his village deity, the goddess Namagiri Thayar), followed by complex mathematical equations. Even with the help of his formally-trained friend GH Hardy, he was only able to prove a small fraction of his insights.
Gregori Perelman is a Russian mathematician best known for solving the Poincare conjecture. He posted his results on arXiv in 2002-03, but never published them in a journal and never accepted any prize or money. He has expressed dismay over the lack of ethics in research.
Anon is a /sci/ user who in 2011 proved the current lower bound of a superpermutation for any size greater than 2 (the Haruhi Problem). Their proof has been archived for posterity, but we don’t know anything more about them.
It takes the same amount of energy to increase the temperature of water by ~70°C (room temp=30°C and boiling point = 100°C) as it takes to send that cup of water 30 000 meters into the air. (If I did the math right)
Now if only we could figure out a way to actually do that without burning a bunch of fuel for the purpose of lifting fuel! Something something tyranny of rockets.
As with so many problems, this one can be solved with a suitably large cannon. Why you’d want to fire cups of water into the stratosphere is left as an exercise for the interested reader.
I sometimes genuinely expect people to know “basic quantum mechanics” and I’ll start ranting about it as if they have some background knowledge and then my roommate looks at me like I’m crazy.
I’m so glad I don’t have to deal with people pretending to know physics that often. Usually I just get “why the fuck did you major in physics” and then I go cry
The funniest part of this comment to me is that it could be said unironically either by someone educated in college or on tiktok
I sometimes expect people to know “basic physics,” which is apparently a bit much to ask sometimes. I don’t mean having a firm grasp on what e=mc² actually means, I don’t even have that. I’m talking about a firm grasp on energy simply being the capacity to do work, and the basic fact that there is no free energy device.
No, you cannot charge an electric car while it’s driving by putting wind turbines on it. No, you cannot use gear ratios to achieve overunity. No, magnets can’t solve the problem either.
PS, if you firmly believe that crystals vibrate on higher frequencies (eta: and that vibration can somehow heal you or something), but can’t describe what frequency amethyst vibrates at in hertz, you are what Dunning and Kruger set out to study
I got curious, so I googled it. There’s a company that sells amethyst that claims it vibrates at 32,876 Hz. They do not describe anything about the physical characteristics of the particular rock they measured, which would have an impact on the frequency at which it vibrates.
Another source claims amethyst resonates with the Crown chakra, which has a frequency of 768 Hz. They do not explain how they derived this frequency. 32,876 is not a multiple of 768, and would not resonate with something that vibrates at that frequency.
Yet another source claims that amethyst vibrates at 963 Hz. It does not list any physical characteristics of the rock they measured, and this is not a multiple of either of the other numbers.
Credit to Beadworks Philadelphia for explaining that different objects have different resonant frequencies, even if they’re made of the same material! Unfortunately, that credit is revoked because they immediately claim that amethyst crystals can cure or treat medical conditions. Shame.
Yes and no. The quartz in watches needs to be tuned to a specific frequency. They do this by either adding material or taking some away, just like a normal tuning fork. Here’s a video explaining it better than I possibly can, and it’s Steve Mould, so you know it’s worth the watch
A crystal’s resonant frequency is determined by its size and shape as well as it’s material. The quartz crystals used in watches and other precision crystal oscillators are machined very exactly. Even then it’s not that they can’t vibrate at other frequencies, they’re just not good at it.
science_memes
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.