I don’t think you have a point. You’re shaming people in a community who don’t give a fuck about your concern trolling. Calling out shitty organizations for shitty behavior in the loudest way possible is often the only way to enact change. There’s a distinct power imbalance between companies that have money and resources versus individuals in the open source community. Polite and firm are useless unless you have additional leverage.
I get that people like to be stubborn about this but there are very real and intuitive reasons that decimals don’t make sense everywhere. Consider how intuitive telling time using “kiloseconds” and decimals might be.
The right tool needs to be used for the right job. I am a scientist. In the lab, metric is fantastic as it allows for precision recording and I don’t care about intuition.
It’s not a point of pride to use one system over another. For example, in America we use both systems in the right contexts. I am happily able to fluidly switch between what’s most appropriate for the situation. I get that context/code switching is generally difficult but I think it’s an overall value add.
If you don’t fight it and accept that imperial is designed with base 12 and not base 10, everything makes more sense. Measurements across all of imperial are to be cut into 12, 6, 4, 3, or 2.
Sometime base 12 works really nicely, especially outside of a lab, when you want to be able to have as many options for division easily as possible.
No, the analogy is more that the oscillations are themselves the particles.
The addition of energy into a system would be this hand push. The fact that the particles themselves exist means that they are oscillations in this mesh (with some energy/frequency). Interactions with other particles can add or remove energy.
Definitely these canvas metaphor are just conveniences. Also, I got it from Zee’s “Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell” which is a standard graduate or advanced undergrad level book on QFT.
Special relativity definitely overlaps with quantum mechanics and that overlap forms the basis of the math used at collider experiments like those at the LHC. Special relativity is simple with 2 rules that let you derive all the equations: 1) no universal reference frames 2) speed of light is constant.
You’re probably thinking about general relativity which defines gravity through the curvature of space time.
If you think about quantum mechanics existing on some “canvas”, that might look like an interlocking mesh of springs (like something under a bed or cot). You could take your hand and bounces it up and down on this mesh, adding oscillations and creating standing waves in the grid. These oscillations would be different particles (electrons, protons) each with their own characteristic frequency of oscillations. If you add energy to the bed of springs, you can “pop” particles into existence. All these particles actually are are just excitations of the mesh/canvas. As of yet, there’s been no way to define or find the gravity particle on this canvas, so right now the canvas of space time and the canvas of quantum mechanics are two distinct “things”.
Cheque? lol don’t give yourself away too hard comrade.
How long ago? ROOT (and other frameworks like GEANT) using C++ has been the standard for over 15 years, but probably longer. I think my advisor was of the last generation that had to write in Fortran.
There’s a remarkable difference in the quality of apps delivered from major tech companies using US developers and apps from contracted employees in places like Eastern Europe. You get what you pay for.
Having said that, I’m sure that there are good developers everywhere in the world. I’m not sure that excellence in the field is as widely rewarded as it is in the US, so why should the quality be high?
For software, if you’re used to big tech wages, you’re not taking less than $180k base. RSUs are probably somewhere like $400k initial grant, anywhere from 25k-100k yearly refresher. US engineers (good ones) are the furthest from cheap.
Bipping is the act of stealing from cars, often through the use of “splashing” (breaking the car windows).
Just the American ones though, right? 🤣
Ese: dude, guy, pal, buddy
I swear people here are either too young or didn’t use the internet 8 years ago. All of this stuff was super common to search and get the first result back as the right answer.
Thinking about this more , you probably want this to develop a curve in your color space that represents something with constant CMYK values for your chosen light source.
https://python-colormath.readthedocs.io/en/latest/conversions.html
E.g. your sodium light is 100% yellow, 10ish % magenta. Any color that varies cyan from 0%-100% and black from 0%-100% should presumably not reflect any additional color information (since the source light doesn’t have any cyan and black is just giving brightness)
I also think this means that as long as you hold Y and M constant, you can vary cyan and black for your comparison colors that will look the same. If you try to vary cyan and yellow or magenta at the same time then your effect probably won’t work.
This is tricky because you have multiple curves in the color space that are valid when just considering a single wavelength. The reality is, your lamp emits a spectrum of light (sharp, but still has a width). There’s also the variability in perception. But I’m not sure what the “bandwidth” of our eyes is and what color resolution humans are capable of detecting.
Low pressure sodium lamps have a pretty sharp spectrum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-vapor_lamp
Looking at the color spectrum, have you just tried and colors in the green to blue to purple range? I don’t think you need a Python library for this, I think you need to experiment. There’s a lot of dependence on the reflectivity of the material you’re looking at in addition to the color you see under sunlight or even indoor light with broad spectrum.
Try blue and green and see if both look the same under the lamp.
Just going to point out that ROOT has used a c interpreter to do this for many many years. Every particle physicist has suffered the details of this, but hey, it’s pretty handy:
Yes, idiots exist in all contexts. If you gather enough people in one spot, a nice, countable handful will be dumb.
See, though, this is the ignorance that stems from not knowing real life burners. The vast majority (actually none) that I know do not claim anything eco about the event. These people understand what the event is. Don’t lump every one of the 100s of thousands of those who have attended over the years with the handful of social media starlets posting bullshit online. I promise many many people at burning man hate those who post anything about the event on social media.
People are children and repeat what they hear. 15 years ago, I would spout the same nonsense about burning man because of what I read on digg/Reddit from the same voices you hear now. I then met a friend who convinced me to go and I had an absolute blast.
For the vast majority of people in the US, let alone the world, attending the event is almost impossible due to cost, time, materials, etc. - it’s much easier for people that live nearby and most people within driving distance, the views of burning man will be more in line with your views - nuanced and reasonable. If you have no experience and no contact with the regular folks who attend, it’s super easy to bucket people into all these groups.
The reasoning about waste and frivolity is total bullshit — don’t tel me your bullshit vacation to Murtle Beach is anymore eco friendly. Or your plane ride to Bangkok to become more worldly is “green”. Burning man is an event, a vacation. I went many times as a student, spending only about $2000 all in. It’s a relatively economical way to have a blast for a week.
This is basically the philosophy of the Amish. I’ll pass.