What is the newest installment of 'Random Thoughts' on Physics Forums?

In summary, the conversation consists of various discussions about documentaries, the acquisition of National Geographic by Fox, a funny manual translation, cutting sandwiches, a question about the proof of the infinitude of primes, and a realization about the similarity between PF and PDG symbols. The conversation also touches on multitasking and the uniqueness of the number two as a prime number.
  • #5,426
nuuskur said:
Oh lord have mercy, I'm in love again. Infatuated at the very least..
Good luck!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #5,427
Wasn't there a line in some song : "Stupid Cupid, stop picking on me"?
 
  • #5,428
WWGD said:
Wasn't there a line in some song : "Stupid Cupid, stop picking on me"?
Oh no! Now I'll have this one in mind the whole day ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJNWYSJ829w
 
  • #5,429
Hmm, my first thought was this. :oldwink:

 
  • Like
Likes collinsmark and WWGD
  • #5,430
Borg said:
Hmm, my first thought was this. :oldwink:


As long as you don't say "Jehova".
 
  • #5,431
WWGD said:
As long as you don't say "Jehova".
... and don't forget to bring a https://www.blumeideal.de/pub/media/catalog/product/cache/b160422aa3e9ae5c444acda3163659bd/1/2/12roterosen.png!
 
  • #5,432
I am so curious about letters from unknowns with random attachments I may just set up a VM to open them up and see what's in them.
 
  • #5,433
nuuskur said:
Oh lord have mercy, I'm in love again. Infatuated at the very least..
Paraphrasing some sage advice from John Saffran...

Try to surreptitiously sniff the other person's underwear -- it's the only way to be sure... ☠
 
  • Haha
Likes nuuskur
  • #5,434
I keep getting recommendations almost daily from Google in YouBoob that i never signed up for.
 
  • #5,435
strangerep said:
Paraphrasing some sage advice from John Saffran...

Try to surreptitiously sniff the other person's underwear -- it's the only way to be sure... ☠
And of risking getting arrested unless you do it the right way at the right time ;).
 
  • #5,436
WWGD said:
And of risking getting arrested unless you do it the right way at the right time ;).
John Saffran actually did it in a TV experiment called "Race Relations".

It's in the category of "I can't believe I'm watching this on FTA TV, but I do believe I'm about to wet myself laughing".
 
  • Like
Likes WWGD
  • #5,437
strangerep said:
John Saffran actually did it in a TV experiment called "Race Relations".

It's in the category of "I can't believe I'm watching this on FTA TV, but I do believe I'm about to wet myself laughing".
A little too "Down Under" for me.
 
  • Like
Likes strangerep
  • #5,438
Seems no one liked my comment on Bohmian Rhpsody in the Quantum forum.
 
  • Like
Likes Keith_McClary
  • #5,439
Maybe we should call it Quantum Foam instead.
 
  • #5,440
fresh_42 said:
Maybe we should call it Quantum Foam instead.
That's what they call it in Bohston.
 
  • #5,441
WWGD said:
That's what they call it in Bohston.
So, if even MIT calls it so ...
 
  • #5,442
fresh_42 said:
So, if even MIT calls it so ...
Yes, they say it WITH an accent.
 
  • #5,443
Don't move this post please. It's non-critical, beer induced, brain fart material.

I don't get how photons are emitted from stars from electrons 24/7 for billions of years without the electrons losing mass. Where the hell do those photons end up? Do they all get sucked back when our universe implodes again? EMR confuses me. I understand that EMR is oscillating and oscillation appears as peaks and troughs when in trajectory, but through what medium in space? I look at the stars on my way to work early morning and it blows my mind that those photons reach my eye from that distance and every millimeter of space. We can only see the photons that enter our eyes, but space is lit up with photons. It's not empty space. Magnetic fields blow my mind too. Gravitational force can hold planets in fixed positions, yet we can just walk through it like it's not there.

I'll read up on it more soon, but I'll never understand it :rolleyes:

One article suggests that electricity moves through electrons to power circuit components, yet another article states it's the electrons moving through the circuit to power components. I currently see it as a said power source (like a phone battery) makes electrons oscillate through a circuit which is a kinetic state. The electrons act like Newton's Cradle but at the speed of light.

I don't understand how 'fields' can exist without mass. What the hell is a field? It's not physical, yet has the power to hold galaxies.

Brain fart over. Good night :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes Keith_McClary
  • #5,444
One other thing..

My work colleague is Muslim. I know we can't discuss religion on here and I respect other peoples beliefs. He asked me what religion I followed and I told him I was atheist. He mocked me daily, but I didn't mind. He showed me gifs on his phone mocking atheists. He thought I was mad when I suggested life originated from our oceans. To cut a long debate short, he went away each night and Googled my answers to his questions and concluded that Allah is light. I told him light is emitted from electrons and Allah is quark. He enjoyed our debates at first. We clashed like Richard Dawkins did with that creationist Wendy Wright. He said, "The Earth will be destroyed and all women will prematurely give birth and the fetuses will have white hair (according to the Quran)". Me, "Do you really believe this?". Him, "I have to. I'm Muslim. Science doesn't explain the Angels". Apparently we have a demon called Jin that floats around us.

He became a sore loser unfortunately. He reported me to management and had me moved to another department. Facts were irreverent. It was his belief verses fact. He said the evolotionary tree was false and all animals were put on this Earth to aid man. He couldn't admit I was right as he had submitted.I hope this post doesn't get deleted as I have nothing against anyone. Just sharing a random experience at work with a friend. He's obviously right. How can 90% of the human population be wrong? :smile:

Each to their own.
 
  • Like
Likes Keith_McClary
  • #5,445
skyshrimp said:
[...] and I respect other peoples beliefs. [...] I was atheist.
Heh, I no longer respect superstition or cults of any kind. If superstition were true it would not need defence.

To paraphrase something a character named "Kenny" once said (while cleaning out a large septic tank)...

Kenny said:
There's a smell in here that will outlast religion. :oldruck:

Some principles to remember:

1) Never engage with a troll.

2) Never argue with an idiot.

3) Don't try to clean out the septic tank by yourself. It is always quickly refilled by others.

4) Concentrate on your studies.

Regarding your opening brain fart... do you actually want any (helpful) answers, or are you just relieved to release the pressure?

I sympathize, as I also experience brain farts sometimes. Curiously, as I get older, I find I have fewer brain farts but more farts of the conventional kind. :skullXbones:
 
  • Like
Likes skyshrimp and BillTre
  • #5,446
strangerep said:
Heh, I no longer respect superstition or cults of any kind.
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre and strangerep
  • #5,447
strangerep said:
Heh, I no longer respect superstition or cults of any kind.
It's OK to say that gods, angels, heaven and hell are superstitious claptrap and that organised religions are money grubbing power seeking scams. Just don't give any specific examples - that's where free speech ends.
 
  • Wow
Likes nuuskur
  • #5,448
I've been in a Zepplin mood all day. It's Nobody's Fault but Mine.

 
  • #5,449
Borg said:
I've been in a Zepplin mood all day. It's Nobody's Fault but Mine.
I dunno. I think you were Led into it.

(It's probably the reversed satanic messages...)
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre, nuuskur and Borg
  • #5,450
When it's below 32 outside, you're putting things in the refrigerator to warm them up.
 
  • #5,451
Reading carefully: Human(Hunan) Chicken sounded intriguing but I was not _ that_ hungry.
 
  • #5,452
I go to work in the morning at 4:15am and one of the stars always catches my eye. It's brighter than the rest and seems to flash greens and reds. Maybe it's a planet? Idk... All the other stars don't flash, yet this one consistently flashes every morning.

I can only see way less than 100 stars due to light pollution in London, UK.

Another mystery is a faint, dense cluster of about six stars in a rectangular formation.

Maybe I could snap a pic on my iPhone so you can see one morning.

I'd really like to camp out in a country where I can view Aurora Borealis and thousands of stars. I'd like to see the faint image of the Milky Way with the naked eye.
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre
  • #5,453
Changing colors, flashing on and off: could it be a light on a distant tower of some kind?
Do you see it every morning?
How high above the horizon?
Over months of time, does it change its position with respect to your local surrounding?
An anchored earthly object would not, a celestial object would.
Stable relationships with its celestial surroundings?

skyshrimp said:
I'd really like to camp out in a country where I can view Aurora Borealis and thousands of stars. I'd like to see the faint image of the Milky Way with the naked eye.

Done it, its great!
There are probably different areas in the UK where viewing might be good. Places in Scotland?
 
  • #5,454
skyshrimp said:
I go to work in the morning at 4:15am and one of the stars always catches my eye. It's brighter than the rest and seems to flash greens and reds.
I know the star. I have similar ones here. They belong to the LHR class!
 
  • #5,455
skyshrimp said:
I go to work in the morning at 4:15am and one of the stars always catches my eye. It's brighter than the rest and seems to flash greens and reds. Maybe it's a planet? Idk... All the other stars don't flash, yet this one consistently flashes every morning.

I can only see way less than 100 stars due to light pollution in London, UK.

Another mystery is a faint, dense cluster of about six stars in a rectangular formation.

Maybe I could snap a pic on my iPhone so you can see one morning.

I'd really like to camp out in a country where I can view Aurora Borealis and thousands of stars. I'd like to see the faint image of the Milky Way with the naked eye.
What direction? And how far above the horizon (specifying distance above horizon in units of "fists held out directly in front of you at arm's length," will suffice just fine)?

I might be able to figure this out for you, also please specify exact time of day when specifying the direction and distance above horizon.

If the star cluster is to your West, very early in the morning this time of year, it could be the Pleiades. As for the twinkling star, I'll need more information.

(I'm assuming your location is somewhere around London, UK.)
 
  • #5,456
collinsmark said:
(I'm assuming your location is somewhere around London, UK.)
... which is why I guessed LHR star(t)s.
 
  • #5,457
skyshrimp said:
I go to work in the morning at 4:15am and one of the stars always catches my eye. It's brighter than the rest and seems to flash greens and reds. Maybe it's a planet? Idk... All the other stars don't flash, yet this one consistently flashes every morning.
I have seen this with bright stars near the horizon. Some explanations:
even on a seemingly clear night there can be a layer of turbulent air above you that will diffract the light from the sources and produce unsteady images. This is usually worse closer to the horizon as well
https://astronomy.stackexchange.com...ect-could-i-have-seen-at-late-june-on-the-sky

https://astronomy.stackexchange.com...stern-morning-sky-not-near-any-constellations
 
  • #5,458
"A geometric distribution can be used to describe a gambler at a slot machine with a poor understanding of probability. It describes a gambler who obstinately believes that the chances of winning become slightly greater each time they pour money into the machine."

Then I wrote this thought down and figured that this analogy wouldn't work unless the gambler had infinite money. And if this were the case, nobody need worry about their gambling addiction. At this point, the novelty is lost because the addiction is kind of the crux of the analogy.
 
  • #5,459
Eclair_de_XII said:
"A geometric distribution can be used to describe a gambler at a slot machine with a poor understanding of probability. It describes a gambler who obstinately believes that the chances of winning become slightly greater each time they pour money into the machine."

Then I wrote this thought down and figured that this analogy wouldn't work unless the gambler had infinite money. And if this were the case, nobody need worry about their gambling addiction. At this point, the novelty is lost because the addiction is kind of the crux of the analogy.
Edit: Isnt this what the gambler's fallacy is about?
 
  • #5,460
So I scraped together what courage I had lying around and asked her out. We're going out next week. Oh dread and worry.. :nb)
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
21
Replies
719
Views
15K
  • General Discussion
77
Replies
3K
Views
130K
Replies
21
Views
849
  • General Discussion
115
Replies
4K
Views
196K
  • General Discussion
65
Replies
2K
Views
145K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
529
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
937
  • Sticky
  • General Discussion
Replies
0
Views
382
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top