402 reputation
110
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 5 months
seen Apr 12 at 22:46

The solution is the vertical (i.e. dense) city! In addition to the major nature waster, it solves a lot of aspects of the problem (e.g. forests and heating). What is the problem? Have you ever heard that all your technological advance is based on oil, that is over?

I ask a lot of questions and "I have extreemly low tolerance for the stupid bullshit" (G. Carlin). Yes, beauty is not relative. Particularly, this means that I do not accept bullshit. Circular argument (it is so because it is so) or unrelated details are not arguments. Do you consider this rude? Go fuck. I'd rather offend people than pander to them.

pay especially close attention whenever an idea is being suppressed.

It seems to me that the idiocy is amplified by Fluff Principle here. I consider Stackexchange a best place for challenging the assumptions in popular beliefs. But, I see that people, who are unable to listen, practice ostracism. The bigots from all over the world confer to ignore my argument and preach what they know, the simple minded beliefs. For instance, why don't we have spacedelta in python, why direction makes difference between scalars and vectors, conductor must gain charge when electrons are set into motion, what is the point of accept method in visitor pattern. These are all cases where I ask to argue for the fundamental basics and all are massively downvoted. People hate to know why popular things are like they are! This is bigotry. Or overprotect me(e.g saying that macros are evil).

Stackoverflow: Debugging means localizing the bug. In 99.9% debugging exposes the bug and it is not a subject of StackOverflow. StackOverflow can only be useful if you describe some weirdness and do it very clearly. You say: here is A and therefore must be B. But I do not see it. What is a problem? The code snippet must be no longer than necessary to expose the problem. When user posts his program awhole, he demonstrates that he made no attempt to localize the bug.


Mar
21
comment Detecting absolute motion with Doppler (reconciling receiver frequencies)
Yes. We need to add a time dilation (Lorentz) factor.
Jan
22
comment Coherence effect on collecting sun light by mirrors
This is what wonders me and this is what I ask about. How is this possible? You add multiple independent (you may add identically distributed) noises and get non-zero in the sum. Might be you can refer me to the branch of probability theory which says that average electric field is 0 but power (and, thus, electric field) is not because power and electric power is not simple average but is something else, e.g. it can be a variance, since it integrates the squares of the deviation?
Jan
22
comment Coherence effect on collecting sun light by mirrors
The question is why do people speak about source coherence when I ask about coherence of the received waves? I ask you how do you achieve the additivity out of incoherent source. Why do you discuss the incoherence of the sun rays?
Jan
21
comment Coherence effect on collecting sun light by mirrors
@OlinLathrop Alternative energy is largely a hype, I believe. Its purpose is to keep people asleep regarding the oil depletion and global warming so that people would buy more cars and build more urban sprawls. It are supposed to be stupid consumers and alternative energy is fine to keep them sleeping. So, the first image that google retreives, seems to serve this purpose very well.
Jan
21
comment Coherence effect on collecting sun light by mirrors
Yes, that is beside the point. The light is random and at some places you get 0 field, in the others duple field. So, net no field increase and, thus no energy summation. Are mirrors additive?
Dec
20
comment What is the relation between electromagnetic wave and photon?
This is news because all QM teachers told me that photons abstractions, proposed by QED, which is more exact than wave discription. However, this should not stop us from figuring out how two are related. Actually quanta = particles.
Dec
20
comment Speed of light and relativity
Your formulation is inconsistent. You start denoting the objects by capital letters A and B, use small quoted italics for speed $'u'$ and, afterwards, say that object $'d'$ has speed $c+u$. Do you ever know what consistency ever is?
Dec
19
comment ${1 \over T} e^{-i/T}$ for Bolzmann-Gibbs distribution
I wonder why Tom named it Gibbs rather than Maxwell and why do Maxwell-boltzmann distribution looks like Plank back body radiation rather than exponent?
Dec
15
comment ${1 \over T} e^{-i/T}$ for Bolzmann-Gibbs distribution
@ComptonScattering Yes, I do not understand why there is $E_i$ instead of simply $E$ or $i$. But there is also partition function in place of T in the nominator.
Dec
14
comment Optimal velocity in rain
I remember I have solved it for rectangular cabinet and the answer is that you must run as quickly as possible since it does not matter at which speed you move, the amount of water you'll get from the front is a constant but the water from the top integrates over time. I also do not understand what does fly to the upper right corner, at $v$?
Dec
10
comment What do they mean by $\langle u_i |O| u_j\rangle$ in quantum mechanics
@user26143 You cannot derive completeness from completeness. I have discovered, the result seems to be purely mathematical one, since $v_i = <i|v>$, $|v> = \sum {v_i |i>} = \sum {|i> v_i} = \sum {|i> (<i|v>)} = (\sum {|i><i|)|v>},$ though the last transform is implausible to me. Yet, I still do not understand why those are coefficients of the matrix. That might be a definition of operator matrix. But, it should agree with how do we normally obtain the operator matrix elements.
Dec
10
comment What do they mean by $\langle u_i |O| u_j\rangle$ in quantum mechanics
@user26143 Do you mean that this is not a simple consequence of basis orthonormality?
Dec
10
comment What do they mean by $\langle u_i |O| u_j\rangle$ in quantum mechanics
@user26143 I do not understand a couple of things. What is the completeness relation?
Nov
28
comment Why are rockets so big?
@CraigThone space.stackexchange.com?
Nov
26
comment Photons from stars--how do they fill in such large angular distances?
I want to expand on NowIGetToLearnWhatAHeadIs. You not only has two questions but they ground on the opposite claims: why do we see so few photons that we can filter them individually (we should see much more photons) and, second, why do we see so much photons - we should not see them at all! This question is based on contradicitons and is not a question at all since it answers itself: it is a fact that stars generate that much photons as you see. What is the question?
Nov
25
comment Why does a helium filled ballon move forward in a car when the car is accelerating?
@Manishearth Exactly. They try to build the system out of the first principles: in "true" physics you have neither atmosphere nor friction and you add the gases onto your planet. In Aristotle's dynamics you however already have the planet configured with air. That is, despite more "true", the Galileo's laws are more outlandish. It makes no sense to ground the asked explanation on them. I wonder how drilling the "true" laws of Nature washes away the ability to observe the "unture" rules around us. You cannot deny the Aristotle's friction saying that "true laws of nature are reverisble".
Nov
22
comment Why does a helium filled ballon move forward in a car when the car is accelerating?
It is impossible to believe that you do not understand that helium lifts up just because of the atomsphere -- where Aristotle's logic is in action. All children on the Earth observe the Aristotles laws of nature. You must know that Galileo is appropriate only in vacuum, i.e. on your Moon, where no helium flies. I wonder how "true laws of nature" make people blind to deny the obvious laws of the Nature and insising on laws in vacuum when discussing the lifting force of the air.
Nov
20
comment Why does a helium filled ballon move forward in a car when the car is accelerating?
@PranavHosangadi of course the heavier ball will touch the ground first. The identical ball, filled with vacuum or Heilum will not touch the ground at all.
Nov
19
comment Why does a helium filled ballon move forward in a car when the car is accelerating?
@wim baloon was submerged under the water in order to increase the weight contrast. Heilum raises up because it is lighter that air. It is even lighter than water. The lifting force in the water is much stronger therefore. Secondly, the blue water edge also shows you the direction of acceleration. The diagram is intuitive to the extreem, therefore.
Nov
19
comment Why does a helium filled ballon move forward in a car when the car is accelerating?
@user33986 Aristotle had taught: that heavy objects fall faster than lighter ones, in direct proportion to weight. Do you think that he was an idiot? No, these are your children who do not see the obvious things. It is meaningless to discuss the behaviour of the baloon in the car with them. I guess that you just overloaded their intuition with Galileos's law so that they stopped to see the apparent things and correct the falling speed as if there is no atmosphere. Others simply have eyes to see that feather drops slower than hammer.