mef51

>> Only by facing reality as clearly as possible can we even begin to make changes that will have a real positive impact on everyone.

While I agree with this sentiment and appreciate all the research shared, I'm not sure a flood of scientific studies is going to be clearly accessible to the significant segment of the general public that doesn't have the training or time to process this information. The quickest and simplest way to "face reality" is not to drown people with long detailed academic studies but to engage with people based on their experiences and needs. I don't need to read a scientific article about what females want on average in a relationship to know that my female partner might be needing more emotional connection, I can just ask her, or encourage her to share that with me. I also agree with the author that people can make rigid assumptions based on gender that are not factual (such as the assumption that there are no personality differences across the sexes); but do the public and the people making policies at the institutional level need to absorb a series of lengthy academic studies to consider the possibility that their assumptions might be wrong? Do we really have hope that this is how things happen? It is simpler to be conscious of what is fact and what is assumption in your own mind and ensure that you leave room for the uncertainty, and to ask this of people who have power.

news article: http://www.sci-news.com/physics/smallest-gravitational-field...

You can have as high of an ideal as you want about physics, quantum gravity, Einstein, Feynman, and hard work, but you should at least be aware when you start to abuse yourself in the name of this ideal. Fifteen hour days in the library? Reading paper after paper while ignoring the feeling you don't have a direction? These are moments where self-empathy can go a long way. And the more you dig into your ideals the less of a pedestal you put them on, and you can see them more clearly as they really are, and as human. Einstein was very close-minded about physics in his late career. Feynman was brilliant but also said a lot of other things other than "Shut up and calculate", which, by the way, the context of which is "eventually you just have to shut up an calculate" (from one of his books I believe). Quantum gravity isn't the only deep mystery in physics. And why does glory always seem to the main motivation for pursuing quantum gravity?

> "But in the end, I never knew what I was looking for and I didn’t find it."

To me it felt like you were looking for meaning and purpose in quantum gravity and its (mis-)characterization as the Grail, or at least in the process of working on quantum gravity. But it seemed like it was difficult to admit to yourself that it wasn't working, which ultimately makes the going even tougher.

I'm in a physics phd right now and I see this disconnect in myself and in other academics a lot.

seeking an interpretation is what leads you to the zen anti-interpretation. You learn and learn and start to understand the things you've learned weren't meaningful.

> the endpoint where you intuitively understand exactly what a Many-Worlder, Copenhagenist, or Bohmian would say about any given issue, and also how they’d respond to each other, and how they’d respond to the responses, etc. but after years of study and effort you’ve returned to the situation of the baby, who just sees the thing for what it is.

> "I toyed with the idea of getting a PCB made up that I could directly solder my switches to. It would certainly have made it easier to put the keyboard together, but I thought outsourcing the manufacturing of a PCB kind of takes the edge off making your own switches..."

Totally! There are ways to make your own PCBs using presensitized boards and exposing it to light ([1] for example) to keep it DIY

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wAer7a3tU4

The data for this discovery as well as other work from CHIME/FRB is available here: https://chime-frb-open-data.github.io/

The author Marshall Rosenburg has also expressed the same feelings about the name and 'compassionate communication' is another way they refer to nvc

This thread got removed from the front page?

Yeah I figured it must be about keeping happy relations with China, but it stills feels a little excessive to actively support the camps instead of just keeping their mouths shut and not signing the letter. Perhaps China pressured them into signing so that they could specifically act like Muslim countries supported them. It's disturbing

The international response to this has been bizarre, and several majority Muslim countries consider this an 'achievement':

"In July 2019, 22 countries including U.K., Germany, France, Spain, Canada, Japan and Australia signed a joint letter to the UN Human Rights Council urging China to close the camps in Xinjiang.[27][110] In reaction to this, 37 countries including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, UAE, Sudan, Angola, Algeria, Nigeria, DRC, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela, Philippines, Myanmar, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Palestine have signed a joint letter to the UNHRC praising China's "remarkable achievements in Xinjiang."[0]

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps#Re...

vice did a 30 minute piece on this craziness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7AYyUqrMuQ

me too, the pattern to me is odds on the numerator and evens in the denominator, and the second fraction goes 1/3, 1/5, 1/7, 1/9...

i think we're saying the same thing i misunderstood your comment. 1357/2468 is the first fraction of the NEXT line that isnt in the image

4th step is 1357/2468

odds to get the 1/3, 1/5, 1/7, 1/9, etc. term and count by alternating digits on the numerator and denominator up to the next even number to get 1/2, 13/24, 135/246, 1357/2468, etc for the first term.

equivalently you just list odds on the numerator and evens in the denominator

which CO2 sensor do you use?

Fancier! Goldreich-Kylafis of molecular lines (which you can do with weakly zeeman splitting molecules) and anisotropic resonant scattering (houde et al. 2013, 2014 etc.)

PHD student... working on measuring the magnetic field in clouds that are really really far away! Astronomically far away! This is to understand and observe star formation.

I don't see myself staying in academia though I love research.

The way NVC has helped me the most is ironically not with conversations with other people but with conversations with myself, and helping me explain to myself why I'm feeling a certain way in response to something. Specifically, what has helped me were the distinctions between feelings and thoughts, and needs being universal while wants are just the ways you try to fulfill a need in a certain moment.

Applying NVC with myself is also a lot less awkward -- with people early on I often overdid it and got a lot of funny looks :) But over time, using NVC primarily to understand a situation, I can pick and choose the way I say it to a person so that person trusts that I'm being genuine instead of just applying a formula.

In my case, the ideas in NVC probably saved my life by giving me a tool to work through several personal crises. In my social group no one really knows NVC or that it's important to me, I often try to be subtle about it. It's fascinating to see it on the front page of HN.

I'd be happy to share my experience with NVC, which I primarily use with myself but often guides my approach to problems at work or with friends.

I thought Bell's theorem ruled out local hidden variable theories? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem

journal paper: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aabe2e/m...

No, the measurements are of the redshift of hydrogen in the galaxy so it's talking about the orbital speeds. Also this quote from the press release: "if you could sit on the extreme edge of its disk as it spins, it would take you about a billion years to go all the way round.”[1]

[1]: https://www.icrar.org/cosmic-clocks/

Implementation is hosted here: https://bitbucket.org/qirong_zhu/taichi_public/

Physics is like sex, it's only fun if you're doing it too

if you're a little crazy you can take the radioactive americium out of a smoke detector and use that as a source

or politics and fame... and also understanding and progress. we want it all mofos!

The paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.6850v3.pdf

cuz everythang with a TLD is a website! and it's long!

Here's a quick list off the top of my head. On the left is a Quantum Mechanics concept, on the right is the math concept its related to.

* The Schrodinger Equation --> Differential Equations. Wave equation.

* Wavefunctions and Normalisation --> Probability Density. Differential Equations and Function continuity

* Bohr Model --> Algebra

* Bracket Notation --> Matrices, vectors, vector spaces, linear independence

* Operators --> Transformations, matrices, unitary matrices

* Commutators --> see operators! maybe a little algebraic field theory for motivation on why AB - BA is not necessarily 0.

* Eigenstates --> these are special wavefunctions. Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors

I recommend Paul Dirac's original Principles of Quantum Mechanics for a baptism by fire. He's the primary source for a lot of this stuff. He simplified a lot of the methods in QM with his Bracket notation.

Sorry if I missed something.

I'm a physics undergrad: his notion is correct :P

you may be able to reproduce a heatmap using this d3 extension.. it's called bubble matrix but both heatmaps and this bubble matrix are meant for displaying two dimensions of data

https://github.com/benbria/d3.chart.bubble-matrix