



that's a a winning combination
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:12,
archived)

also, i love these pictures more than i love life itself.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:15,
archived)

You've failed. That's it. That was your chance at happiness. Sorry man.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:25,
archived)

I could totally click my BBC sport bookmark but I want my snooker updates full of opinions and randomly capitalised words.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:29,
archived)

O'Sullivan Vs Ebdon is a little rough around the edges, but with a 4 frame lead to Ronnie it'll take something extra special for Ebdon to win.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:31,
archived)

By every conceivable metric except the following:
Baldness
Slowness
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:32,
archived)
Baldness
Slowness

Or whatever mid-Northants dump Ebdon's from.
Edit: Yeah, born in Kettering. I hate him already.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:33,
archived)
Edit: Yeah, born in Kettering. I hate him already.




It wasn't very civil of her.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:32,
archived)

Would you? Well would you?
clickety click for trusting bunnies with fire

( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 23:57,
archived)
clickety click for trusting bunnies with fire


( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:08,
archived)

Also: I just discovered you can get open directories of images on b3tards.
Take a b3tards image link (here's Valin's, above)
www.b3tards.com/u/74ab07594148489da262/sheepgothic4.gif
Drop the file name
www.b3tards.com/u/74ab07594148489da262/
And there's the craziest page on the internet.
You can also google that letters-and-numbers bit in there to see if your pictures are being used elsewhere.
Apologies if this is common knowledge.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:56,
archived)
Take a b3tards image link (here's Valin's, above)
www.b3tards.com/u/74ab07594148489da262/sheepgothic4.gif
Drop the file name
www.b3tards.com/u/74ab07594148489da262/
And there's the craziest page on the internet.
You can also google that letters-and-numbers bit in there to see if your pictures are being used elsewhere.
Apologies if this is common knowledge.

Nice to know that I'm not just a number . . . but an alphanumeric !
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:01,
archived)

Except I never thought to see if anyone's leeching my bandwidth. I'm off to Google.
Edit: No-one's stealing my pictures. Fucking ingrates.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:01,
archived)
Edit: No-one's stealing my pictures. Fucking ingrates.


Fantastic! I was going to keep updating that but then kind of actual life came in the way and I couldn't keep up with people's images. Glad to see that some people have looked at it :)
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:09,
archived)

www.anjunabeats.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=33704&start=0&p=804387entry804387
GOLDEN, says the man below.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:14,
archived)
GOLDEN, says the man below.

A gem!
By the way, unofficial word from Oslo is I've got the job. Tomorrow or Thursday it should become official. Then I celebrate!
Edit: I just read some of that website again. That was entertaining to write.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:16,
archived)
By the way, unofficial word from Oslo is I've got the job. Tomorrow or Thursday it should become official. Then I celebrate!
Edit: I just read some of that website again. That was entertaining to write.

I am delighted for you :)
I've invested a lot of time in asking you whether you've got it yet and it's nice to see that pay off.
Now get me a job there too.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:19,
archived)
I've invested a lot of time in asking you whether you've got it yet and it's nice to see that pay off.
Now get me a job there too.

Last time I was there the cleaners hadn't even heard about the room on the top of the building. It's up some stairs at the back. Stairs they haven't even seen.
Fancy being a cleaner?
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:24,
archived)
Fancy being a cleaner?


...ten, since that's when Norway will buy Sweden outright.
Can I get a peace prize?
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:31,
archived)
Can I get a peace prize?

And yeah sure I'm gonna base my whole application on your candidacy for the prize. My way of saying thanks for the cleaner job. First rung and all.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:36,
archived)

Two years then.
Bloody bossy Norwegian academics. Cheers for the prize, though, and don't forget to clean that patch behind the bath. They never clean there.
(There is a bath in the toilet upstairs at the office. I like this place.)
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:42,
archived)
Bloody bossy Norwegian academics. Cheers for the prize, though, and don't forget to clean that patch behind the bath. They never clean there.
(There is a bath in the toilet upstairs at the office. I like this place.)


Magical linking too !
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:43,
archived)


I don't know if he's unlucky or the luckiest blob of plastecene that ever lived.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:45,
archived)


if anyone wants the software i wrote to make these and has a googlephone, do a search on Market for "glastonbridge animal." sorry for the spam but i am rather proud of it

thats fab, you should sell it you dong
edit: oh im guessing you are already :D well done
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:26,
archived)
edit: oh im guessing you are already :D well done

if it's popular i'll look into it :)
edit: no, it's totally free
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:27,
archived)
edit: no, it's totally free

and woo on making software to do this with a phone, however I'd never even heard of a googlephone, I have a proletariat one.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:41,
archived)

Keep going . . . and going . . . and . . .
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:45,
archived)

loving the skids he's laid down there ;)
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:54,
archived)



Sounds quantum mechanical to me.
Someone please kill me :(
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:22,
archived)
Someone please kill me :(

that the Dirac constant is some sort of mediator to an uncertainty relationship between position and momentum operators as they are non-commutative? That's madness. Pure madness.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:38,
archived)


Edit: Fuck GIMP and its habit of adding random glitches because it doesn't optimise GIFs well enough to actually save the actual changes between frames. Also I should have got rid of the i not the hbar. Then it'd only be another diffusion equation. Hahaha TAKE THAT SCHROEDINGER YOU DEAD CAT-HATING WOMANISING CUNT. But it's too late now. :(

I've heard bad things. One time my friend told me it raped his mum :( With big, black tentacles. :((
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:58,
archived)

It's a Lagrangian that produces the Gross-Pitaevskii equation, which is more or less the Schroedinger equation for a Bose-Einstein condensate of weakly-coupled atoms. (It's basically just a mildly-nonlinear Schroedinger equation; the coupling term is just the first-order expansion in the energy.)
The Schroedinger equation isn't at all Lorentz-covariant. Though, entertainingly, if you take that Lagrangian and linearise it, the system you get can be cast as a relativistic wave equation. The phonons propagate on an effective Schwarzschild spacetime, complete with event horizon and Hawking radiation. Fascinating shit, on which I can be a TOTAL BORE.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:06,
archived)
The Schroedinger equation isn't at all Lorentz-covariant. Though, entertainingly, if you take that Lagrangian and linearise it, the system you get can be cast as a relativistic wave equation. The phonons propagate on an effective Schwarzschild spacetime, complete with event horizon and Hawking radiation. Fascinating shit, on which I can be a TOTAL BORE.

not my bag, I'm all for Dirac myself.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:10,
archived)

but I don't think you get acoustic black holes out of a linearised Dirac system. Neither do you get one from a linearised Klein-Gordon system.
What I did like was a paper a few years back that clearly started as a really nerdy joke -- a couple of guys who put a condensate around a black hole and found that you can have an acoustic black hole orbiting a gravitational black hole. Oh, how we laughed.
They've made an acoustic hole in the lab now, a couple of months back. I almost jizzed my pants.*
* May not have almost jizzed my pants.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:12,
archived)
What I did like was a paper a few years back that clearly started as a really nerdy joke -- a couple of guys who put a condensate around a black hole and found that you can have an acoustic black hole orbiting a gravitational black hole. Oh, how we laughed.
They've made an acoustic hole in the lab now, a couple of months back. I almost jizzed my pants.*
* May not have almost jizzed my pants.

but what does it tell us about the fundamental nature of the universe?
The Schrodinger Equation pops out of the Dirac Equation in the non-relativistic limit, so I'm sure you could wangle an acoustic black hole out of it if you were so inclined and knew what you were doing.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:16,
archived)
The Schrodinger Equation pops out of the Dirac Equation in the non-relativistic limit, so I'm sure you could wangle an acoustic black hole out of it if you were so inclined and knew what you were doing.

The dynamics of an acoustic hole are the same as a gravitational one -- so the sound waves act around an acoustic hole exactly as light waves do around a (uncharged, non-rotating) gravitational black hole. If Hawking's arguments, which are still basically the only result we've got marrying gravity and quantum mechanics together, are valid then we'll see Hawking radiation from an acoustic black hole. Since it's pretty impossible to make a black hole in the lab (and, yeah, that includes the LHC, the theories that would produce black holes there are pretty speculative stuff), this is more or less our only concrete and cheap way of testing the interaction of gravity with quantum effects.
The thing I'd add is that an acoustic black hole is like a normal black hole except it only works on sound waves. The easiest way of imagining one is to get a tube and wrap it on itself and send water through at just below the speed of sound. In the direction of the flow, as viewed from the lab, the sound waves are moving at almost, but not quite, twice the speed of sound. Opposing the flow, they're almost stationary. If you now squeeze the tube then the flow goes supersonic at that point. In the supersonic patch sound waves can't travel against the flow -- they're swept along regardless, like sperm trying to swim up the Niagara Falls. At the point where the flow goes supersonic you've got an acoustic event horizon, while at the point it goes subsonic again you'd have another horizon (that one would correspond to a white hole).
Interesting stuff. Not actually that *useful* but if I wanted to be any use to humanity I wouldn't have done theoretical physics and then sat about on B3ta drawing magenta cocks onto Snoopy cartoons.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:23,
archived)
The thing I'd add is that an acoustic black hole is like a normal black hole except it only works on sound waves. The easiest way of imagining one is to get a tube and wrap it on itself and send water through at just below the speed of sound. In the direction of the flow, as viewed from the lab, the sound waves are moving at almost, but not quite, twice the speed of sound. Opposing the flow, they're almost stationary. If you now squeeze the tube then the flow goes supersonic at that point. In the supersonic patch sound waves can't travel against the flow -- they're swept along regardless, like sperm trying to swim up the Niagara Falls. At the point where the flow goes supersonic you've got an acoustic event horizon, while at the point it goes subsonic again you'd have another horizon (that one would correspond to a white hole).
Interesting stuff. Not actually that *useful* but if I wanted to be any use to humanity I wouldn't have done theoretical physics and then sat about on B3ta drawing magenta cocks onto Snoopy cartoons.

I'm not convinced they're an exact analogy but they might shed some light on things, so to speak.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:34,
archived)

I got the words the wrong way round, but it's the kinematics that are analogous. The dynamics are totally fucked. Meaning that the geodesics are the same (so Hawking's arguments are safe; they didn't rely on the Einstein equations) but the Einstein equations coupling them to matter are totally different. In relativity that's just the Einstein equations in their horrible non-linear glory. In acoustic holes it's pure non-relativistic wave equations -- you don't need to look at quantum fluids to get acoustic holes, you can build them in any perfect fluid. So the dynamics are governed by Newtonian mechanics.
Still, it is an interesting curiosity. There's a small but entertaining group of physicists trying to use these arguments to get a totally different picture on quantum gravity and the standard model by getting it from emergent systems in condensed matter. If you're actually interested, Volovik put up "The Universe in a Helium Droplet" on his website for free download a few years back; he basically found pretty mucha ll the symmetries of the standard model and of relativity emerging from perturbations in superfluid Helium II. The dynamics were totally wrong again, but the symmetries were all there. If someone can find a system where the symmetries *and* the dynamics emerge, then the conventional picture of finding unification by pushing to ever-higher energies and adding symmetry after symmetry will be overturned.
Which would be nice.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:47,
archived)
Still, it is an interesting curiosity. There's a small but entertaining group of physicists trying to use these arguments to get a totally different picture on quantum gravity and the standard model by getting it from emergent systems in condensed matter. If you're actually interested, Volovik put up "The Universe in a Helium Droplet" on his website for free download a few years back; he basically found pretty mucha ll the symmetries of the standard model and of relativity emerging from perturbations in superfluid Helium II. The dynamics were totally wrong again, but the symmetries were all there. If someone can find a system where the symmetries *and* the dynamics emerge, then the conventional picture of finding unification by pushing to ever-higher energies and adding symmetry after symmetry will be overturned.
Which would be nice.

that is simultaneously both surprising and not surprising, somehow.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:53,
archived)

An uncharged non-rotating black hole?
What good is that in the real world, I ask you?
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:16,
archived)
What good is that in the real world, I ask you?

REAL black holes are like REAL men. Errr, spinning around and round and with a healthy electric field, and emitting a constant stream of radiation. In men that's called "farting". Also, they've got another universe hidden inside them. Through the ring.
I'm going to shut up now. I think that would be a good idea.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:31,
archived)
I'm going to shut up now. I think that would be a good idea.

don't think you'd get an acoustic hole out -- it relies on the equations being hyperbolic. the schroedinger equation is hyperbolic but i don't think the dirac equation is.
i may very well, however, be dead wrong because it's now about seven years since i looked at the classification of differential equations. if the dirac equation *is* hyperbolic then it's possible we'd get an acoustic hole. i may look into that actually. it'll while away the long winter evenings...
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:25,
archived)
i may very well, however, be dead wrong because it's now about seven years since i looked at the classification of differential equations. if the dirac equation *is* hyperbolic then it's possible we'd get an acoustic hole. i may look into that actually. it'll while away the long winter evenings...

the Schrodinger equation IS the Dirac equation in the non-relativistic limit, so any solution the former has, the latter ought to have as well. I don't know how you'd get a self-interaction term to work though, but there must be some Lorentz covariant form of it, because if it isn't Lorentz covariant, it can't be true, otherwise Special Relativity isn't true.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:32,
archived)

Thing is the acoustic hole comes along because of the behaviour of fluctuations; at low energies this is fine, but at high energies there's no immediate reason to believe that there isn't something influencing the fluctuations (indeed, there will be) that changes their behaviour enough that now they don't look like they act on a Schwarzschild spacetime. I'd not be surprised to find that you can't write an effective spacetime at all for the high-energy general case, and only at low energies.
The self-interaction term is just coming from a Taylor expansion of the Gibbs free energy. Or it may be the Helmholtz free energy. One of the two. It's also actually not quite a Schroedinger equation because that psi isn't a wavefunction so much as the product of the individual wavefunctions of the atoms in the condensate. So if you follow the kind of arguments made for the low-energy case and put it at high energies you could doubtless write a modification to the Dirac Lagrangian that included an interaction. Just that it would be a bit odd to consider a high-energy Bose-Einstein condensate...
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:38,
archived)
The self-interaction term is just coming from a Taylor expansion of the Gibbs free energy. Or it may be the Helmholtz free energy. One of the two. It's also actually not quite a Schroedinger equation because that psi isn't a wavefunction so much as the product of the individual wavefunctions of the atoms in the condensate. So if you follow the kind of arguments made for the low-energy case and put it at high energies you could doubtless write a modification to the Dirac Lagrangian that included an interaction. Just that it would be a bit odd to consider a high-energy Bose-Einstein condensate...

in fact I believe the two are pretty much the same thing. Having said that, the general case is often difficult and not particularly useful. I couldn't honestly tell you if the Dirac equation has any real world applications outside of particle accelerators. It's just, kind of... nice.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:58,
archived)

lorentz invariance underpins special relativity -- and general, since special relativity is recovered from general in the flat limit. there'll certainly be real-world applications of it; it's the equation governing the behaviour of relativistic electrons, and if it doesn't have some application somewhere in semiconductor physics that has a bearing on modern computers i'd be quite surprised...
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:05,
archived)

when they move on to the 32nm process. Even still, electron drift velocities may be very low even though the signal speed approaches the speed of light.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:11,
archived)

even so, i'd be surprised if they didn't have to take relativity into account at some point. though i should maybe prepare to be surprised.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:17,
archived)

HAVE A PICTURE TO MAKE UP FOR THE PHYSICS IN THIS THREAD

MORE PHYSICS. SPUNKING.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:33,
archived)

MORE PHYSICS. SPUNKING.

Also:
www.dafont.com/punched-out.font
Fiddliest thing I have ever done. Argh.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:21,
archived)
www.dafont.com/punched-out.font
Fiddliest thing I have ever done. Argh.

I'm attempting to spell out somebody's name but damn it's fiddly. My hands are maybe 75% encased in glue.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:24,
archived)
![Challenge Entry: Jesus on Tour [challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif)

But it really really hurts.

He doesn't want to wait around all fucking day, you know. He's a busy dragon, he's got things to do, people to see, virgins to eat.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:24,
archived)


i understand. i did leave her boobs alone for a reason.
i'd not be surprised to find that you didn't notice i'd done anything with her eyes.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:39,
archived)
i'd not be surprised to find that you didn't notice i'd done anything with her eyes.

I like Shmorky's work and I would have liked to have seen more Zalgo comics :(
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:11,
archived)

Inordinately. If that's how you spell it. Perhaps I should actually read some Lovecraft one of these days.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:29,
archived)

"Sex Positions for Ghosts Without Bellies"
the best-selling sequel to
"How to get Head from the Headless Horseman"
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:55,
archived)
the best-selling sequel to
"How to get Head from the Headless Horseman"

with radioactive goo. Mixed with fish feed.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:21,
archived)

Allegedly someone called Fabiana Tambosi.
www.aclasscelebs.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35699
This may not be true.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:21,
archived)
www.aclasscelebs.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35699
This may not be true.

I don't know how to say that more tastefully. I suppose I could have said 'naughty pillows'.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:57,
archived)

Or "cushions". "Gazumbas".
Tera Patrick has bigger gazumbas.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:30,
archived)
Tera Patrick has bigger gazumbas.

that must count for something surely
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:48,
archived)

It's all the same. But Jesus loves us all.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:56,
archived)
![Challenge Entry: Jesus on Tour [challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif)


but not like this
not like this
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:10,
archived)
not like this

as that cat will never let another human touch it again...
IN OTHER NEWS:
SCoopzilla has Google wave invites to give out.. if you want one...
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:22,
archived)
IN OTHER NEWS:
SCoopzilla has Google wave invites to give out.. if you want one...

it looks to me like youve just added a couple of frames to another omgshock video...
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 20:43,
archived)

pretty sure the original is staged....the angle the cat comes back suggests it's not falling... it's either jumped...or is edited on landing...just a hunch:)
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:30,
archived)

especially FREE FISH TASER LISCENCE
I would buy it for that alone.
( ,
Tue 8 Dec 2009, 19:02,
archived)
I would buy it for that alone.
« Older messages | Newer messages »
