jndsn402

I will check out the Feynman lectures, thanks for the reference. But my initial reaction is, isn't the measuring thing somewhere past the slit? So how could its presence there influence which slit the photon goes through?

I have a math background, no physics. Whenever I try educating myself about this stuff I get hung up on the contradictions and can't/don't want to just take certain concepts as given in order to understand more advanced concepts.

For example (from the pdf of the intro to this course, https://courses.edx.org/c4x/BerkeleyX/CS-191x/asset/chap1.pd...):

"Logically, we can ask which slit the photon went through, and try to measure it. Thus, we might construct a double slit experiment where we put a photodetector at each slit, so that each time a photon comes through the experiment we see which slit it went through and where it hits on the screen. But when such an experiment is performed, the interference pattern gets completely washed out! The very fact that we know which slit the photon goes through makes the interference pattern go away."

I read that and say, really? The fact that we know about it? How does the photon know that we know about it? I always feel like this is just a layman's way of describing what happens, but there is actually a more rigorous understanding among physicists. Is that the case? Because after reading that sentence I want to stop right there and redo that experiment until we figure out what's really going on.

I thought the defense's case was that Ulbricht was the original, and then passed it on to someone else (now revealed to be Karpeles).

Not sure how it's relevant to HN, but as someone who passes through Penn almost every day, an interesting read. A real shame - looking at those pictures I can't even imagine that it used to look like that.

Coursera has lots of data science courses: www.coursera.org

You might be interested in data science competitions, e.g. www.kaggle.com

IMO, the problem with the way Common Core has been implemented is that there is a whole new analytical/critical thinking component that is bundled together with math. But parents when parents think of math they think of computation, arithmetic, formulas etc. Not 'explain why ancient calendars used 60-day units' (actual question from my daughter's 6th grade curriculum, may be misquoting a bit. The answer is because 60 has many factors).

I'm not saying it's good or bad to teach math that way, it was just not communicated well and still isn't. Math has been replaced with math+critical thinking. It's as if English class now also included Latin. Maybe good, maybe bad, but it's a whole different class.

Thanks! I was not aware of codepen.io - looks very interesting and I will check it out further. Thanks for the other link as well.

That's correct - I would like to learn that way. I was wondering if there is any code teaching resource that actually bridges the gap between the relatively basic and abstract content on e.g. Codecademy, and actual implementations 'in the wild'. Ideally something like the annotated Backbone documentation linked by bzalasky, but for a complete website (although the Backbone links are a great resource and I will be checking them out).

Your suggestion and the other commenters' are great - thanks!

> (largely uninformed: I welcome correction)

I like your use of colon rather than semicolon. Was that deliberate?

Fellow of the Society of Actuaries

I think it's popular because everyone has a character they can relate to.

The gang gets DNA tested and discover Sheldon is descended from cavemen, while Penny is related to Einstein! Meanwhile, Leonard and Raj have a run-in with the building super (Harrison Ford guest stars)

It's complex, but has that aspect of simplicity (unity). Lots of different applications as well, constructions of polygons and so on. I'm not a mathematician, but when I first read that the number one has cube roots, fifth roots, etc I found it very counterintuitive and cool.

Roots of unity

There are various articles describing people's experience, e.g.:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/calebmelby/2013/06/07/a-week-wit...

Seems like people describe it as a liquidy bread dough or pancake batter taste.

I'm no expert, but that does not seem to make any sense. Is there any merit to what he is saying?

Definitely worth a chat. Email me, ydschwartz at gmail

A website to compare and buy annuities. Don't have it up yet, any suggestions appreciated.

Will be renting there in a few hours. Hopefully will have a better experience.

That's a terrific idea (the backtest - sentiment analysis is interesting but the backtest could be a core part of the offering).

Very cool.

This is really useful.

Great list. Thanks.

Agree. I would potentially rent a laptop at an airport.

Are you sure you didn't? Many companies have language like this buried in the employment agreement (mine does):

I agree to disclose and assign promptly, completely and in writing to the Firm any inventions, whether or not patentable, and including but not limited to, any innovations on processes, methodologies, software applications or products which I discover, conceive and/or develop, either individually or jointly with others, during the term of my employment with the Firm ("Inventions"). I understand that all inventions which I do hereby assign are and shall become the exclusive property of the Firm, whether or not patent applications are filed thereon, and I agree to treat such inventions as Firm proprietary and confidential information and to use such solely for the benefit of the Firm.

Anyone else think of the Cliffs of Insanity when crossing the GW bridge?