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

[BillTre]

Could be, but I already carry one and it's full to the hilt.

Bigger pack or sling things (like coats) through the straps.

 

[WWGD]

Bigger pack or sling things (like coats) through the straps.

Could be too. I heard some companies make "modular" clothes that you can put together or remove easily, a sort of "clothes Lego".

 

[WWGD]

Could be too. I heard some companies make "modular" clothes that you can put together or remove easily, a sort of "clothes Lego".

Maybe you can eat them too. Wasnt there a slogan "Lego my Eggo". I tried it, but almost choked on the Lego ;).

 

[BillTre]

You should have made a waffle out of the Legos® before trying to eat them.

 

[WWGD]

You should have made a waffle out of the Legos® before trying to eat them.

What makes you think I didn't? ;).

 

[Astronuc]

Be prepared and don't do stupid sh*t!

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20180913-a-frozen-graveyard-the-sad-tales-of-antarcticas-deaths

 

[WWGD]

The teens are over and now we're into perfect vision : 2020. Happy New Year to all. And the usual cheesy joke: "Talk to you next year" .

 

[Matterwave]

The teens are over and now we're into perfect vision : 2020. Happy New Year to all. And the usual cheesy joke: "Talk to you next year" .

"next decade" - FTFY

 

[WWGD]

"next decade" - FTFY

Good point. Edit: But we'll never had back the " See you next millenium " from 12/31/99.

 

[fresh_42]

Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.

 

[Matterwave]

Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.

Eh, the delineation of a "decade" is somewhat arbitrary anyways. Since most people refer to the decade as 10-19 inclusive (the 2010's) then I think I'm good :D

 

[fresh_42]

Eh, the delineation of a "decade" is somewhat arbitrary anyways. Since most people refer to the decade as 10-19 inclusive (the 2010's) then I think I'm good :D

Yes, but it's wrong. Ten is ***0.

The 80s are 1980 - 1989, the decade is 1981 - 1990.

 

[Matterwave]

Yes, but it's wrong. Ten is ***0.

The 80s are 1980 - 1989, the decade is 1981 - 1990.

I'll just quote wikipedia:

"Any period of ten years is a decade, and there is no 'official' legal nor administrative start or end point,[1][2] so it can be any arbitrary span of ten years. "

"The frequently used method to refer to decades is the cardinal method, which groups years based on their shared tens digit, such as the nineteen-sixties (1960s) referring to the period from 1960 to 1969.[4][5]"

"The rarer ordinal decade counts years beginning with the year AD 1, as the Gregorian calendar counts ordinally rather than cardinally, and hence there was no year zero. For example, the term 196th decade spans the years from 1951 to 1960. "

So I choose the cardinal method rather than the ordinal method. This is the way. :)

 

[Ibix]

I choose the cardinal method this year and the ordinal next year. Two end-of-decade parties - what's not to like?

 

[WWGD]

Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.

I thought people were really confused back then: We're in 3BC and next year is 2BC? Who is C?

 

[WWGD]

Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.

So we went from -1 to 1? As long as I have my Pannetonne (Sp?) I am ok.

 

[Ibix]

I thought people were really confused back then: We're in 3BC and next year is 2BC? Who is C?

We'll soon C?

 

[WWGD]

We'll soon C?

Not the one I'd like 2B. Not even in 4D *

 

[WWGD]

Re 4D:
I felt guilty and did not take my friends money on a bet that I can watch movies in 4D --
the apartment of another friend.

 

[fresh_42]

So we went from -1 to 1? As long as I have my Pannetonne (Sp?) I am ok.

Yes.

 

[WWGD]

Yes.

Like a Complex log, a discontinuity at the origin.

 

[fresh_42]

Like a Complex log, a discontinuity at the origin.

Only proof that $0$ isn't a natural number! It was the first pure mathematical discovery.

 

[WWGD]

Only proof that $0$ isn't a natural number! It was the first pure mathematical discovery.

"Pure"?

 

[fresh_42]

Pure in the sense that some Indians a couple of thousand years ago suddenly decided to count something that isn't there!

 

[WWGD]

Pure in the sense that some Indians a couple of thousand years ago suddenly decided to count something that isn't there!

But it seems you can say something similar about negative integers and ultimately the Reals.

 

[fresh_42]

But it seems you can say something similar about negative integers and ultimately the Reals.

Yes, but zero was first. The integers were probably discovered by an ancient bookie.

 

[WWGD]

Yes, but zero was first. The integers were probably discovered by an ancient bookie.

I guess it is the type of stuff in what's his name's book, fluffernutter's Godel , Escher, Bach (Im on my phone, hard to search and come back). Ill get to it some day I hope. Edit: Make that Hofstatder ( a mouthful) instead of fluffernutter.

 

[WWGD]

Kind of weird phrase: Sidney and Cindy in Disney.

 

[WWGD]

Kind of strange that now they have the acronym STEAM : Science, Technology, Arts and Mathematics. Nothing against art, just not clear on how/if it belongs in the selection.

 

[fresh_42]

Kind of strange that now they have the acronym STEAM : Science, Technology, Arts and Mathematics. Nothing against art, just not clear on how/if it belongs in the selection.

Guess it's because you missed the E(scher).