PHYSICS

Call me Ket or Finn! || 22 || They/Them || Physics Major (who would have guessed?) || Queer || Autistic || gender?? || Other than physics and math here you will find my bullshit and personal posts. I made this sideblog because I wanted to blabber and overshare, and I felt that my main was becoming too crowded. (also people who know me irl follow me there, so Yikes tm) Feel free to interact and/or message me! I am friendly and I love to chat.

[hapalopus]

The worst thing that ever happened to LGBT+ discussions was the attempt at creating rigid definitions for diverse experiences that often exist on a sliding scale, or are fluid. Some lesbians experience attraction to men. Some gay men, who were forced to marry women for their own safety, did really love their wives. Some people are man and woman at the same time. Your gender identity and sexual orientation can change over time. In the 70s it was common knowledge that bi women could also be lesbians. Some people defy categorization just by their existence. Some people choose to reject categorization.

[rotational-invariance]

I saw on reddit a post of a girl who was asking for romantic advice that made me wish post like this one were plastered all around the place. Her trans friend confessed he had romantic feelings for her, and she was in love with him before he came out as trans, but since she was a lesbian she "couldn't date him anymore", and was asking for ways to deal with heartbreak and move on, while I wanted to rip my hair off. Guys. Labels are supposed to help you find community and further your understanding of yourself, not to impose limits on what you can and cannot do. You can't let your labels define who you can and cannot date, as if they were a divine and unchangable sentence. Sometime you fall in love and that's it. You don't have to redefine your whole identity. You can love one man and still feel that lesbian is the label that fits you better, or even most of the time. No amount of "I can't love him, I'm straight" has ever erased a crush. I don't understand why the reverse should work.

[girlcaligula]

God I detest this kind of posts

WE ARE BOTH!!! That’s what is so fascinating about us!!! We are capable of great horrors and great love!!! And it’s important to remember it’s in our personal capacity to be both because otherwise it’s far too easy to distance ourselves from terrible acts and deem them as ‘inhuman’. They are not inhuman because we are human and we commit them. Therefore, saying that we as humanity are just inherently good is as much of a lie as to say that we are just inherently evil

[numb3rth30ry]

A deeply intuitive, aesthetically pleasing geometrical “proof without words” that the sum of the first n cubes is the square of the nth triangular number, sometimes called Nicomachus’s theorem.

Mathematics is beautiful. <3

[tiralatele]

[finofilipino]

Wait for the master.

[thebroccoligoblin]

The amount of confidence oozing from this dude

[jumpingjacktrash]

i re-watched it several times, looking for what he does differently. finally i spotted it. look at the line of motion in his strike. it’s not especially fast, he doesn’t wind up more than the others, and it’s not a matter of strength – the guy who knocked over the stand probably put more muscle into it. but there’s a unity of movement he has that the others lack. his body and sword are all one curve. everything moves at once along the same line.

from a physics perspective, that means all the force he’s applying is concentrated at the point of contact between his sword’s edge and the target, and it moves at just the speed that breakage propogates through the material. too slow and it wouldn’t have enough force; too fast and he’d get ahead of the break, shoving the target over instead of cutting it.

from a writing perspective, that means that i should focus on describing a master swordsman’s smoothness more than their strength or speed, and can also have witnesses be confused at the effectiveness of strikes that don’t actually seem all that fast.

[necarion]

More than anything, it is probably edge alignment. It is one of the most important things swordsmen need to study; your best strike doesn’t do much if the sharp thing isn’t in the same line as the path of travel. A good sword is very very sharp and does most of the cutting work here. But when you’re 4 bamboo posts deep, if you have even a tiny bit of difference in the direction you’re trying to sweep and the direction the blade alignment wants to put your sword, you are going to find your blade comes to a very fast stop.

[mxbuster]

There’s also a difference between his end point and the other (unsuccessful) attempts. His end point is outside the last roll. If you look at some of the others, they are aiming *at* the rolls, not through the rolls. Their effective end point is point of contact, where the successful slice ends outside of the obstacle.

[kane-dream]

Also from a physics perspective: look at where he starts his slash: behind his back. That sword has so much angular momentum that it barely needs speed. And then to top it all off, the master bends his knees so his body follows the sword. If you look at the students in the beginning, some of them have a few of the points down and they get pretty far. Being a master is about having so much experience, that flawlessly combining three ways of making your cut more efficient looks easy.

[nervespike]

Andrew Dixon | CRT-Bot

[glumshoe]

oh. hate this.

[rotational-invariance]

Oh, no, this is good news. It means we can get rid of her and put you at her place.

[materialsscienceandengineering]

Following Atoms in Real Time Could Lead to New Types of Materials and Quantum Technology Devices

Researchers have used a technique similar to MRI to follow the movement of individual atoms in real time as they cluster together to form two-dimensional materials, which are a single atomic layer thick.

The results, reported in the journal Physical Review Letters, could be used to design new types of materials and quantum technology devices. The researchers, from the University of Cambridge, captured the movement of the atoms at speeds that are eight orders of magnitude too fast for conventional microscopes.

Two-dimensional materials, such as graphene, have the potential to improve the performance of existing and new devices, due to their unique properties, such as outstanding conductivity and strength. Two-dimensional materials have a wide range of potential applications, from bio-sensing and drug delivery to quantum information and quantum computing. However, in order for two-dimensional materials to reach their full potential, their properties need to be fine-tuned through a controlled growth process.

These materials normally form as atoms ‘jump’ onto a supporting substrate until they attach to a growing cluster. Being able to monitor this process gives scientists much greater control over the finished materials. However, for most materials, this process happens so quickly and at such high temperatures that it can only be followed using snapshots of a frozen surface, capturing a single moment rather than the whole process.

Read more.

[wiispeak]

wii sports spinning disc

[polyglotplatypus]

havent seen the mitchells vs the machines but as someone who was ostracized as a child for just being weird it doesnt seem that far fetched to me lol, like it seems dumb and arbitrary but it sure happens. (being able to destroy an ai by just dropping a phone in water is wack though, the evil is still out there)

im saying that because in the film, katie literally IS wildly appreciated and her kind of humour is SUPER successful so it just doesn't make any sense in the context of the movie that she'd be seen as that weird. plus imo she's literally just kinda quirky. they really couldve done something special by making her actually weird

[rotational-invariance]

I hadn't seen this film yet, but since everybody was talking about neurodivergent representation I was hoping she would have been my kind of weird, not the popular and immediately lovable one. Oh well. I guess it's difficult to make actually weird characters and still make money, since everybody dislike weird weird people /s

[synthient]

absolutely fascinated by this raw pixels on an emulator vs how the game was actually supposed to look on old tvs twitter

[ask-maxie-boy]

People say that old games dont look as good as they remember

Its because they legitimately dont.

[crtter]

The “fuzz” from CRT monitors was something that was definitely accounted for and taken advantage of back in the day when it came to video games! While this effect is noticeable in 3D games, it’s MUCH more visible when it comes to 2D sprites:

Just look how much more depth these simple sprites of Princess Peach and Bowser from Super Mario RPG seem to have when seen through the “dots” of a CRT TV screen!

[rotational-invariance]

@ everybody in the notes complaining that the right side images give you headaches: this is a picture up close: you saw like in the right pictures only if you were literally inches from the TV! As soon as you got a little bit further away you weren't seeing the dots anymore, and the overall result was way more pleasant.

[cybergata]

[engage-with-zorp]

this next one’s a slow jam

[ante--meridiem]

I love the fact that you agree that "likeable" and "relatable" are not fun traits in a character, for the same reasons that you do. The things that make me like a character aren't their innocence, kindness, things that I would like in a friend (which, I should note, I have pretty specific standards for as well!); and as a real person, I don't find anything relatable about being a blank slate for the reader to project their own personality onto ;)

Glad you agree! Personally I do like to relate to characters in some way, but I can find relatable traits in the most unrelatably intended characters and having the author emphasise their relatability ruins it for me a bit. As for the blank slate - yeah. I think a large part of making characters "relatable" involves removing distinctive or potentially unpleasant aspects that might be unrelatable to some, thus making them less interesting.

[rotational-invariance]

God, how I hate when an author points at a character "Here! This is the Common Man tm! Their struggles are just everyone's! Isn't it relatable?". To find generic traits that encapsule the majority of people means zooming out enough that singular details become undistinguishable. Every men behave the same if you look at them from afar, but this completely remove their depth. The Relatable Character is not more interesting than a guide on Bird's Behavior, for me. I am not interested in finding a whole character relatable; rather I'd prefer using a narrative to explore even a single trait that me and a character may share. I can possess a trait that I actively suppress for a whole array of reasons, but reading about a character who lives unapologetically with it and brings it to its extreme can be interesting, both from a narrative and a self-introspection point. Especially if the trait in question is something that most people would prefer wouldn't exist at all.

[ante--meridiem]

That "define your fucking terms" post I reblogged once but at my lecture notes that keep using a variable that I can't find a definition for anywhere

[unknought]

fields of mathematics

number theory: The Queen of Mathematics, in that it takes a lot from other fields and provides little in return, and people are weirdly sentimental about it.

combinatorics: Somehow simultaneously the kind of people who get really excited about Martin Gardner puzzles and very serious no-nonsense types who don’t care about understanding why something is true as long as they can prove that it’s true.

algebraic geometry: Here’s an interesting metaphor, and here’s several thousand pages of work fleshing it out.

differential geometry: There’s a lot of really cool stuff built on top of a lot of boring technical details, but they frequently fill entire textbooks or courses full of just the boring stuff, and they seem to think students will find this interesting in itself rather than as a necessary prerequisite to something better. So there’s definitely something wrong with them.

category theory: They don’t really seem to understand that the point of generalizing a result is so that you can apply it to other situations.

differential equations: physicists

real analysis: What if we took the most boring parts of a proof and just spent all our time studying those?

point-set topology: See real analysis, but less relevant to the real world.

complex analysis: Sorcery. I thought it seemed like sorcery because I didn’t know much about it, but then I learned more, and now the stuff I learned just seems like sorcery that I know how to do.

algebraic topology: Some of them are part of a conspiracy with category theorists to take over mathematics. I’m pretty sure that most algebraic topologists aren’t involved in that, but I don’t really know what else they’re up to.

functional analysis: Like real analysis but with category theorists’ generalization fetish.

group theory: Probably masochists? It’s hard to imagine how else someone could be motivated to read a thousand-page paper, let alone write one.

operator algebras: Seems cool but I can’t understand a word of it, so I can’t be sure they’re not just bullshitting the whole thing.

commutative/homological algebra: Diagram chases are of the devil, and these people are his worshipers.

[rotational-invariance]

I understand why differential equations just says "physicists", but as a physicist I want to point out that despite solving more differential equations than simple equations the only class our University has about them is one in the math department and on the presentation page there's written that "physicist are encouraged to not enroll"

[biolegend]

Helpful tips for your next seminar.

[rotational-invariance]

Physicists: we can have a little bit of abuse of notation... as a treat

[senatortedcruz]

why r there SO many film/book/tv people on here (and twitter) that are like “I want every plot point spoon fed to me like an idiot and NEVER want to engage with content rated higher than PG”

[senatortedcruz]

the notes on this post are god’s punishment for assuming that the average tumblr user has a crumb of reading comprehension. 

[elliottpiss]

[rotational-invariance]

The fact that one could genuinely think she's not being sarcastic gives us some horrible informations on the current social media's landscape