Its nice, overall, to have a little dedicated touchscreen on my desk that I can easily tweak to display whatever I want. Its silent and low power.
1,734 karma · joined September 11, 2011
Its nice, overall, to have a little dedicated touchscreen on my desk that I can easily tweak to display whatever I want. Its silent and low power.
https://steamcommunity.com/games/353370/announcements/detail...
>last year i bought a Rodecaster Duo to solve some audio woes to allow myself and my girlfriend to have microphones to our respective computers when gaming together and talking on discord in the same room without any echo
Calculating the derivative of the energy with respect to nuclear charge would be fun, as it would let you perform some type of "alchemy" smoothly changing from one element to another. I'm not sure that has any practical use.
I read a paper a while back doing something alchemical that I guess this reminded me of: https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article-abstract/133/8/084104/1...
Say you have a 1 in by 1 in area of paper and a printing resolution of 300 DPI then there are 300*300 total dots. If the printer is monochrome and each dot is either black or white then there are 2^(300^2) possible symbols.
Basically, there will be error in the positions and velocities due to the integrator used and you don't know how to patch it up. You have 1 constraint; the total energy should be constant. There are 2(3N-6) degrees of freedom for the positions and velocities (if more than 2 bodies). The extra constraint doesn't help much!
Edit: Also, the only reason thermostats work is because the assumption is that the system is in equilibrium with a heat bath (i.e. bunch of atoms at constant temperature). So there is an entire distribution of velocities that is statistically valid and as long as the velocities of the atoms in the system reflect that, you will on average model the kinetics of the system properly (e.g. things like reaction rates will be right). In gravitational problems there is no heat bath.
> You can’t hide secrets from the future with math
> You can try, but I bet that in the future they laugh
> At the half-assed schemes and algorithms amassed
> To enforce cryptographs in the past
I used to work at a company that wrote an atomic scale simulation package. Every dev was a physics/chemistry PhD turned coder. We didn't quite hit one comment for _every_ line of code, but we were close! At first I really hated this style; one comment every few lines. However, I eventually learned to kind of like it, even though it was a bit redundant.
I don't really have a point here, but I just wanted to echo your statement that the physicists-turned-coder style is real!
Corn sugar is the monosaccharide glucose (more specifically its a specific stereoisomer of glucose called dextrose or D-glucose).[1] Cane sugar is sucrose, which is a disaccharide of composed of glucose and fructose.[2]
There is no way to enzymatically convert a monosaccharide to a disaccharide, you would need to be joining the glucose together with a fructose, which, as we are not fruit don't just have naturally occurring in our body.
When you eat sucrose, the enzyme sucrase-isomaltase located in the small intestine catalyzes its hydrolysis into fructose and glucose.[3,4] High-fructose corn syrup is a mixture of glucose and fructose which is exactly what you get when your body enzymatically breaks down sucrose.[5]
So corn sugar is glucose. Sugar can is sucrose. And high-fructose corn syrup is a mixture of "pre-digested" sucrose. I think that high-fructose corn syrup is probably bad in that its in everything and cheap, but I can't see how its any worse than regular sugar. And corn sugar is not the same as regular sugar, it lacks fructose entirely.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_sugar
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugarcane
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucrase
chineese sheetmetal/cnc milling/3d printing (including metal): https://www.pcbway.com/
But if you can find a local fabricator that is probably best as they can help you understand if you design is manufacturable as is or if there are some simple tweaks that would make it cheaper/easier.
Glass is amazing for chemistry not only because it is chemically inert, transparent, has a high melting temperature, and is reasonably strong but also because it is easy to clean!
Anyways, I don't have anything to add about the Newton; I never owned one, but old technology can bring up some strong positive feelings about simpler times.
My understanding is that most bluetooth devices interface with the operating system over a standardized host controller interface (HCI) over a UART or SPI interface. Basically the OS sends some standardized commands to the HCI and receives some data back. This means that the OS doesn't have full control over the radio and are limited in what they can do to a set of standardized commands[1]. For example, even if you monitor everything that OS sends/receives over this HCI channel (using, e.g. btmon on Linux) you will not see everything that is going on.
For example, with bluetooth classic, during inquiry (discovering pairable devices) you don't really see all the details of what the device is doing. The hardware doesn't seem to signal anything about a host devices scanning you and the reply packets that are sent. I was trying to debug some issues with Windows 11 not discovering my device (despite it being in inquiry scan mode and that my phone could see it but not my desktop) and btmon was totally unhelpful in this case and I believe it to be a limitation of how the OS and the bluetooth device communicate at a fundamental level. It turns out the answer to my particular issue was the "class of device" that my device reported wasn't one that Windows 11 will show during pairing.
[1] https://software-dl.ti.com/simplelink/esd/simplelink_cc13x2_...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_law#/media/File:Bla...