JKNMurph

A clip shot in my VRChat world vrchat.com/home/world/wrl…. The simulation implements a quantum scattering model proposed by Carolyne Van Vliet in 2010, in which the matter in the slit screen momentarily interacts coherently to 'kick' particles as they pass through the apertures.

@fishPointer It's a complex relationship.

one day we will look back on ourselves with shame for ever calling them “imaginary numbers”

@lauriewired Emitter-Coupled Logic, which keeps transistors in the linear operating range, can run at up to 300°C, but you can't pack a lot of it into a small space.

I’ve always wondered, why can’t we run CPU’s hotter? Look at any modern CPU, and the maximum junction temperature (TJMax) is around 95ish C. Leakage current explodes past that point, and reliability drops off a cliff. But the question is…couldn’t you make a “tougher” transistor? The answer is…sorta. The Glenn research center at NASA experiments with silicon carbide wafers. Venus is crazy hot (~470C!). Apparently, NASA has been somewhat successful running a medium-scale IC at 500C for 1 year. Ozark IC also won a contract to develop a multicore RISC-V cpu intended to operate at 500C, but I haven’t seen updates in a while. Perhaps an EE can chime in. Is ~95C TJMax just a local optimum that everyone collectively settled on? How much density would you have to give up to run things just a little bit hotter? I wonder if a special, “low density space H100” could reliably run at say, ~150C, or if that’s completely outside the realm of what’s feasible.

@demystifysci If they can explain everything in physical reality, how do you use this model to reproduce some simple interactions, such as the Compton effect, and then predict the results we see? Or do these bodies always just magically behave in just the right way to always fit the result.

@JKNMurph they are actually 😂

Critically defining "physical" for physics

@bcubeddd So Eric, are these geniuses in the podcast studio with us now?

🧵🧵🧵THE QUESTIONABLE GEOMETRY OF GEOMETRIC UNITY, A THREAD 🧵🧵🧵 Or, how the first definition in Eric Weinstein's Geometric Unity draft (v April 1st, 2021) is quite bad, so you might as well ignore the whole thing.

@aifilmmaker @LanDor999 Are these geniuses in the room with us now?

@LanDor999 No, I think a grifter knows what he’s saying isn’t true. But I think he really believes what he says, it just happens to be nonsense. It probably makes sense to him in his delusional mind.

Personally I think this guy suffers from delusion, but because he uses big words no one catches on. Everything he says about everything is nonsense.

@Samuel_Gregson "Now, grasshopper, to master the principle of the laser, I must initiate you into the path to the inner deadly ninja priest - but you must never speak of it to anyone"

Wtf is this guy waffling about?

@SebWhitaker_QFT @Samuel_Gregson Does "narcissistic slop" work as a term?

@Samuel_Gregson Absolute nonsense as usual 😂

@Samuel_Gregson And lasers!

@Samuel_Gregson It led to both the de Broglie matter wave concept and the Compton effect. Meanwhile, Bohr was off cooking up BKS and deriding the light quanta as a heuristic. arxiv.org/abs/physics/02…

I’m confused 🫤 Firstly, I have no idea what evidence shows relativity (special or general) is struggling. Also, what’s the fear? It seems almost certain that our current understanding of physics will be incorporated into something more general. That’s called history.

@Samuel_Gregson The clip was below the OP post you shared (relativity is next). I thought it relevant because their versions of QM and black-body theory are human-generated slop, and they seem completely unaware that they might be blindly projecting their own behaviour. x.com/i/status/20589…

@JKNMurph What’s the link there?

@marino_beiras @ShreyaG5400 Interestingly, it also doesn't describe a physical wave process; the probability distributions derived from it evolve in free space in the same way as diffusion equations, and they are not actually dependent on a hidden wave-interference mechanism to produce fringe patterns.

@ShreyaG5400 The Schrodinger equation is an axiom of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, so it is postulated, not derived from more basic principles. One can give heuristic arguments why is true, which are of course of paramount importance, but there is no derivation in the mathematical sense

okay the book just confessed they got no idea about the true derivation of this equation (schrodingers wave equation) but theyll ramble on anyhow about it and eventually manipulate it into existence???? ummmm okay guys

@Samuel_Gregson I nominate Brian Keating for the podcast.

@t_andoel @EGHaug It slaps you in the face before you can see it.

@EGHaug Logisk at viserne står stille hvis man beveger seg vekk fra klokka med lysets hastighet, men hva skjer hvis man beveger seg mot den i samme hastighet?

Beyond Conventionalism: Testing the One-Way Speed of Light via Classical Entanglement Synchronization qeios.com/read/CLN0ZP

@oops_all_nutt @AstroMikeMerri @whatep And this sample gives you a data point?

@JKNMurph @AstroMikeMerri @whatep 🤔

1. “Data”, like “news”, is a non-count noun — you ask “how much data do you have,” not “how many…” 2. Non-count plural nouns take singular verbs. (“The news is bad”, not “the news are bad.”) 3. So “the data is…” is grammatically correct; scientists should get over themselves.

@AstroMikeMerri @oops_all_nutt @whatep I agree, we normally ask how many samples are in that data, not how many (insert supposed plural of datum).

@oops_all_nutt @whatep No one asks “how many data do you have?”