Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
I bet you didnt know that
Options
Comments
-
Yes, yes, all well and good, but is the cat ok?
Exactly my thoughts
About Fourier's entanglements:
My current job is to translate a book with so-called Sherlock Holmes puzzles. It's fun, but boy they chose puzzles with mathematical solutions I'm struggling to understand, never mind to translate them into German :rolleyes:
So I'm sorry that I can't be bothered right now to understand what your entanglement means (the only entanglement I can think of right now is my hair in the morning).
I'm just happy that I could, for that translation, disentangle the Fibonacci sequence. No, don't ask.0 -
-
Yep, to the Classical world Ireland and the Irish were "Scotti" and what is now Scotland was usually included with that, though Caledonia was named out as specifically Scotland. Though more specifically again and later in the mix someone, a Scotti who was Irish often got Eriugena tacked onto their name. IE from the Latin; "Irish born", as Eriu was the name of Ireland, after a goddess of the same name. Erin more latterly. Erinland, Ireland. The word appears to be pre Gaelic in origin. It may have a root that means land of plenty. The Classical world varied on this. Greek and Roman lads who mentioned the place either thought of it as a land of plenty, where as one guy reported it the grass was so good cattle were in real danger of exploding from the goodness, or as a Land of Winter. That's one of its other names. Hibernia, which translates as the "Land of winter". That's where we get the word "Hibernation" from, when some animals sleep through the winter.
To be fair, it is Ireland, so it can be both, which is likely how the Classical types got a tad confused.
Ireland (Hibernia) is unique as a country in that it marked the limit of Roman expansion across Western Europe (inclusive of the part called Scotia attached to Alba..) There is some evidence to suggest that the Romans had made plans to invade the island of Ireland but so far any definitive archaeological evidence of that is absent.
If the Romans had sent over a couple of brave scouting parties - the chances were that the vast expanses of bog and usual rain sodden summers probably put them off for good
The ironic thing about the island of Ireland as the only country is Western Europe not invaded by the Romans - is that a Roman patronym -
'patricius' (from which the name Patrick is derived) was adopted as the numero uno national forename. The only country in western Europe to do so.
It is postulated that the latin term patricius in turn derived from patres conscripti ('Roman senators,' literally 'fathers.') which was allegedly the name given to the first 100 men appointed as senators by Romulus were referred to as "fathers" (Latin 'patres') and the descendants of those men who became the patrician class. Some other accounts detail that the patricians (patricii) were those who could point to fathers, i.e. those who were members of the clans (gentes) whose members originally comprised the whole citizen body of Rome.
In general the term was variously used to refer to Roman nobleman or patricians. Of course in Ireland the name is linked to st 'Patrick" a romanised britton
Is it somewhat ironic that all those long dead Roman nobles are now immortalized in the various Hibernic names such as Patrick, Paddy, Padraig, Padraic and Padraigin - in a country never even invaded by their countrymen?0 -
Chicago is famous for its architecture and one of the best things to do there is to go on a river cruise run by the architecture society there. Almost every building along the route has some cool history or fact about its design philosophy.
Three things I remember the most. The river is like a sideways 'T', it runs from the lake and than branches into the north and south branch. The location below is where the river branches.
The white building just off center was designed to provide every apartment stunning (and very expensive) views all the way down the Chicago river. The building is only one apartment deep so all the hallways and elevators are on the side facing away from the river. In fact, it even featured in a Nic Cage movie as his character's apartment::no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4710955/vlcsnap-2014-12-08-23h53m29s67.0.jpeg)
However, a few years ago, the dark building in front of it started development which would block the views of most of the apartments. The residents sued the developers to stop building but the judge dismissed the case because views are not a protected asset in Chicago.
You can see how the new building has blocked almost all of the older one
Looking at the angles, the one that Nic Cage was in, which is on the edge, might still have decent views but there are now a lot of p*ssed of owners of the other apartments who now have a lovely views of their neighbour's windows instead of downtown Chicago.
Secondly, the building on the left of the first photo that is like a Y was built on a plot of land that was long thought to be unbuildable. The city mandates that any new building must be set back a certain distance from the river and there is railway on the other side. This leaves a very narrow area on which to build, hence the narrow base. One of the problems is overcoming the building sway in high winds, which is even more problematic for this building due to its top heavy design. To overcome this, the top of the building has large water tanks. A computer systems monitors the building sway in real time and creates artificial waves in the tanks to counteract the sway. The severity of the waves is linked to the degree to which the building needs to counter sway. Crazy ingenuity there.
The third one is about the building below in the middle of the photo:
For some reason I can't remember, it was not possible to build foundations for one of the corners of the building. So, the metal structure on the roof is actually holding up that corner of the building from the roof. The tour guide described it as placing your arm underneath your knee and using that to support your leg.
So anyone intending to visit Chicago should definitely do this tour. It is absolutely fascinating.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Can second that, it's an unbelievable tour, one of my favourite cities in the world.SimonTemplar wrote: »Chicago is famous for its architecture and one of the best things to do there is to go on a river cruise run by the architecture society there. Almost every building along the route has some cool history or fact about its design philosophy.
Three things I remember the most. The river is like a sideways 'T', it runs from the lake and than branches into the north and south branch. The location below is where the river branches.
The white building just off center was designed to provide every apartment stunning (and very expensive) views all the way down the Chicago river. The building is only one apartment deep so all the hallways and elevators are on the side facing away from the river. In fact, it even featured in a Nic Cage movie as his character's apartment:
However, a few years ago, the dark building in front of it started development which would block the views of most of the apartments. The residents sued the developers to stop building but the judge dismissed the case because views are not a protected asset in Chicago.
You can see how the new building has blocked almost all of the older one
Looking at the angles, the one that Nic Cage was in, which is on the edge, might still have decent views but there are now a lot of p*ssed of owners of the other apartments who now have a lovely views of their neighbour's windows instead of downtown Chicago.
Secondly, the building on the left of the first photo that is like an upside down Y was built on a plot of land that was long thought to be unbuildable. The city mandates that any new building must be set back a certain distance from the river and there is railway on the other side. This leaves a very narrow area on which to build, hence the narrow base. One of the problems is overcoming the building sway in high winds, which is even more problematic for this building due to its top heavy design. To overcome this, the top of the building has large water tanks. A computer systems monitors the building sway in real time and creates artificial waves in the tanks to counteract the sway. The severity of the waves is linked to the degree to which the building needs to counter sway. Crazy ingenuity there.
The third one is about the building below in the middle of the photo:
For some reason I can't remember, it was not possible to build foundations for one of the corners of the building. So, the metal structure on the roof is actually holding up that corner of the building from the roof. The tour guide described it as placing your arm underneath your knee and using that to support your leg.
So anyone intending to visit Chicago should definitely do this tour. It is absolutely fascinating.
One tip for visitors: go to the Hancock building, my favourite in the city, but don't go to the observation level, which costs about 18 dollars, instead to to the bar, on the level below that, which is free to all, have a seat, and order an overpriced beer. Same great view, plus a seat and a beer. If you're lucky like me and my friends were, you'll only wait in line a couple of minutes before being seated with an amazing view of the skyline (minus the best building in it because you're in that one) as evening turns to night.
Then eat an Italian beef sandwich somewhere cheap and cheerful and thank me later. Not sure this all qualifies as stuff I bet you didn't know, but I really wanted to respond to your great post, reminded me what a great city it is. Used to live nearby, miss it a lot.0 -
I've been trying to think how to explain this for a while and because I've been reading a history of the Caribbean, I'm going to use pirates.
Entanglement is a set of coincidences between particles that are so regular and specific that you'd naturally think they are communicating, but it's pretty much impossible for them to, so nobody can explain what is going on.
The situation is pretty easy to explain.
.......
I stopped reading at this point.... (joke)0 -
Yep, to the Classical world Ireland and the Irish were "Scotti" and what is now Scotland was usually included with that, though Caledonia was named out as specifically Scotland. Though more specifically again and later in the mix someone, a Scotti who was Irish often got Eriugena tacked onto their name. IE from the Latin; "Irish born", as Eriu was the name of Ireland, after a goddess of the same name. Erin more latterly. Erinland, Ireland. The word appears to be pre Gaelic in origin. It may have a root that means land of plenty. The Classical world varied on this. Greek and Roman lads who mentioned the place either thought of it as a land of plenty, where as one guy reported it the grass was so good cattle were in real danger of exploding from the goodness, or as a Land of Winter. That's one of its other names. Hibernia, which translates as the "Land of winter". That's where we get the word "Hibernation" from, when some animals sleep through the winter.
To be fair, it is Ireland, so it can be both, which is likely how the Classical types got a tad confused.
The First king of a United Ireland was Erimon/Heremon/Eremon.. theres a number of spellings.
He was the son of the Milesian king who invaded ireland over throwing he Tuatha De Dannan. Eremon controlled the south and his brother Eber controlled the north and htey had a falling out. Eremon went on to defeat his brother and in so doing he became the first ruler of a single ireland.
Ive considered that is where we got the name Eire/Erin from... as in Eremon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rim%C3%B3nÉrimón,[1] (modern spelling: Éiremhón) son of Míl Espáine (and great-grandson of Breoghan, king of Celtic Galicia), according to medieval Irish legends and historical traditions, was one of the chieftains who took part in the Milesian invasion of Ireland, which conquered the island from the Tuatha Dé Danann, and one of the first Milesian High Kings. A year after the Battle of Tailtiu, Éber Finn became unhappy with his half, fought a battle his brother at Airgetros, lost and was killed. Érimón became sole ruler of Ireland. He appointed kings of the four provinces.
http://www.ireland-information.com/irish-mythology/the-melesians-irish-legend.html0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,099 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59028
It's possible alright. They mentioned the place from time to time alright and one writer whose name sadly escapes reckoned he could take the place with one legion, but *personal opinion* it was never really on the cards. For one reason; economics. Their invasion and takeover of England was not a profitable exercise and was much more about the prestige involved. With a side order of wounded Roman pride. Julius Caesar invaded first, installed a local puppet king and then left. Augustus thought about it a few times but decided nah, not worth it. Caligula had a go, an extremely wasteful one(he ordered his men to collect seashells on a French beach. As you do), but never left the coast of France. Claudius took over and actually made a successful invasion. Hadrian throwing up his wall on the border with Scotland was likely a "right so, this is the limit of empire"(it would have been near useless as a defensible structure).Ireland (Hibernia) is unique as a country in that it marked the limit of Roman expansion across Western Europe (inclusive of the part called Scotia attached to Alba..) There is some evidence to suggest that the Romans had made plans to invade the island of Ireland but so far any definitive archaeological evidence of that is absent.
The Roman empire's borders had always been decidedly fluid in nature. They didn't have the manpower to operate hard borders like we think of today and they didn't really think of borders as hard the way we think of them today. How they generally operated was by sending in an army to a new place, kicked a few arses(often didn't have to), then converted/installed a local warlord as Roman and then sent in engineers to build roads for trade and tax. In particularly profitable and/or troublesome places they'd install a governor. Many such territories were Roman in name only for the most part. They didn't tend to impose any cultural imperial stuff like later empires. Roman cultural influences were nearly always willingly absorbed by the local population who actively wanted them. Cultural influences went the other way too. The Romans collected new religions in particular. Christianity irritated them because it was monotheistic. Citizenship was different too. No requirement to swear loyalty, though it was kinda a given, no cultural exams or any of that. It was bestowed and seen as a gift and accorded the person extra rights. In many ways the Roman's built an empire by mistake and at a pace that sometimes surprised them.
It was also the first foray by missionaries of the new Christian religion beyond the borders of what had been the Roman Empire. In every other case they stayed within that sphere of influence. Beyond was considered bandit country. When the Irish Church became established and strong(as it was more stable than the mess left in mainland Europe after the "fall" of the Western empire) it the sent its own missionaries back into the Roman sphere(and beyond).The ironic thing about the island of Ireland as the only country is Western Europe not invaded by the Romans - is that a Roman patronym -
'patricius' (from which the name Patrick is derived) was adopted as the numero uno national forename. The only country in western Europe to do so.Is it somewhat ironic that all those long dead Roman nobles are now immortalized in the various Hibernic names such as Patrick, Paddy, Padraig, Padraic and Padraigin - in a country never even invaded by their countrymen? Never thought of it like that. Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
Big post, but I've exhausted the main physics topics I wanted to try to explain, so this will be the last one for a long while.
He's the Captain.Yes, yes, all well and good, but is the cat ok?
Since it has come up.
Schrödinger's cat was more Schrödinger complaining about an idea popular in Quantum Mechanics early on and really the idea is Einstein's. It should be "Einstein's keg".
At the time people were reading certain terms in the equations as saying something was "in two places at once", "moving at two speeds at once", "spinning in two directions at once". Einstein sent a letter to Schrödinger saying this is daft because you could apply QM to a keg of gun powder and if you read the equations the same way you'd be forced to say the keg was exploded and not exploded at the same time. Which is daft, because you never see such a keg. Einstein's point was that QM is actually just saying there's a certain chance for the keg to explode and a certain chance for it not to (this would be majority view amongst physicists today), it's not saying both happen at the same time.
Schrödinger, to make the point more striking, then wrote a paper about a cat in a box being poisoned. The same reading would force you to think the cat would be alive and dead. Which is daft. So it's just that QM is giving a chance for the cat to live or die.
Einstein quite liked Schrödinger's change, but kept a little bit of his original version. When he explained it to students when lecturing or in newspaper articles he had the cat be blown up.
Ironically modern pop science books reverse the real point and use it to say "QM says a cat would be alive and dead!"please advice wrote:ah, don't go changing topics when i was just about to ask how do you explain the Casimir effect or Hawking Radiation...
The Casimir effect is easy enough to describe and explained terribly by most books.Fourier wrote:I'll return to this myself in a week or so, but just to give you something.
The van der Waals force is the electric effect that holds water together. Basically a small amount of electric charge leaks out of each water molecule, letting it "stick" to others. When you boil water with a kettle what is happening that you are overcoming this sticking power. Many other substances besides water have this sticking force.
The Casimir effect is just that when you add in relativity the van der Waals force in some metals gets so strong it actually leaks out of their surface and can stick two plates of metal together. Nothing to do with "particles popping in and out of existence".
To quote R.L. Jaffe, professor at MIT and an expert on the Casimir force:
https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0503158Jaffe wrote:The Casimir force is simply the (relativistic, retarded) van der Waals force between the metal plates.
As for the Hawking effect it also does not involve "particles popping in and out of existence". Hawking in his original paper just say it's a nice way to keep the calculation in your head:
However as he then says:Hawking wrote:One might picture this negative energy flux in the following way. Just outside the event horizon there will be virtual pairs of particles, one with negative energy and one with positive energy.Hawking wrote:It should be emphasized that these pictures of the mechanism responsible for the thermal emission and area decrease are heuristic only and should not be taken too literally.
Particles near a black hole aren't created from nothing/pop into existence. They're created by the black hole, one of the most powerful objects in existence. This is why the black hole shrinks over time, it has to pay for creating these particles. I never understood describing them being "created from nothing". If a black hole, something with the power to rip open a star, counts as "nothing" you've a funny definition of nothing.
To close off, just so you don't think some eijit on boards has filled your heads with nonsense about Quantum Mechanics!
This is Joseph Emerson of the Institute for Quantum Computing at Waterloo describing QM in a lecture given in 2017. I've extracted a small part of the lecture which I think nicely summarises what I've been saying about QM. That is that it doesn't explain what's going on, just the chances of devices and detectors clicking and lighting up.
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
Since it has come up.
Schrödinger's cat was more Schrödinger complaining about an idea popular in Quantum Mechanics early on and really the idea is Einstein's. It should be "Einstein's keg".
At the time people were reading certain terms in the equations as saying something was "in two places at once", "moving at two speeds at once", "spinning in two directions at once". Einstein sent a letter to Schrödinger saying this is daft because you could apply QM to a keg of gun powder and if you read the equations the same way you'd be forced to say the keg was exploded and not exploded at the same time. Which is daft, because you never see such a keg. Einstein's point was that QM is actually just saying there's a certain chance for the keg to explode and a certain chance for it not to (this would be majority view amongst physicists today), it's not saying both happen at the same time.
Schrödinger, to make the point more striking, then wrote a paper about a cat in a box being poisoned. The same reading would force you to think the cat would be alive and dead. Which is daft. So it's just that QM is giving a chance for the cat to live or die.
Einstein quite liked Schrödinger's change, but kept a little bit of his original version. When he explained it to students when lecturing or in newspaper articles he had the cat be blown up.
Ironically modern pop science books reverse the real point and use it to say "QM says a cat would be alive and dead!"
....
Interestingly this debate is very much alive (and dead!)
Recently the caretaker of the Schrodinger Building at the University of Limerick couldn't determine whether the cat was in and / or out of the building at the same time or were there in fact two cats. No body has been found however ....
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
The guy who first realised that the terms in the equations of QM I mentioned above were actually probabilities was Max Born, who is also the grandfather of Olivia Newton-John.Interestingly this debate is very much alive (and dead!)
Recently the caretaker of the Schrodinger Building at the University of Limerick couldn't determine whether the cat was in and / or out of the building at the same time or were there in fact two cats. No body has been found however ....0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,307 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 6208
Near Kolkata, India, there is a 250 year old banyan tree that has aerial roots covering 3.5 square acres of land, which equals roughly 156,000 square feet, or 14,400 square meters. To give you a rough guess of how large the space is, your local Aldi would take up 20,000 square feet or thereabouts.
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ma6ku-peus
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement