Steuard

26 ms·

181.
by Steuard 10y ago
I'll be honest: high energy physics isn't really an area where "hunches" carry a lot of weight, at least if those hunches aren't grounded in a pretty thorough understanding of particle physics and general relativity
182.
by Steuard 10y ago
I've got a theory that string theory is more of a sociological phenomena than real science. I've got to say, that comes across as awfully dismissive toward a whole lot of very thoughtful people. I'm not entirely sure what y
183.
by Steuard 10y ago
Speaking as a professor specializing in string theory, I'd say, "More power to her." I have no idea whether string theory gets too much attention relative to its actual value in modeling the real world, but I think one essent
184.
by Steuard 10y ago
Evidently there are still a few lingering problems with NoScript (which appears to be the most popular extension not currently marked as compatible, according to https://www.arewee10syet.com/ ). That one's a big deal fo
185.
by Steuard 10y ago
I'm very puzzled about level 8, based on what you've said. Certainly to be a good pedagogical tool, I'd want to see a system that very visibly showed a wider and wider diffraction pattern for longer wavelengths (as you&#x27
186.
by Steuard 10y ago
I'm glad to hear that you've appreciated that tutorial! It's especially neat to hear about it being useful to people who aren't just cramming for a class.
187.
by Steuard 10y ago
Not that a quality post like this needs it, but for what it's worth, as a physics professor I'd happily endorse just about everything you've said in this detailed response to the text accompanying the game (all four parts). (
188.
by Steuard 10y ago
It's fairly common for people to relate this quantum phenomenon to the uncertainty principle, though. Someone asks: "Why can't I just say 'the particle is at rest in this small area' and expect it to stay there fore
189.
by Steuard 10y ago
A few thoughts, speaking as a physics professor who asks his relativity students to play both "Velocity Raptor" and "A Slower Speed of Light": * Like many others here, I was a bit dismayed to see this implemented as a Ja
190.
by Steuard 10y ago
I know this is only tangentially related to the HN content here, but does anyone have a sense of why the FBI would choose to respond to this sort of case with a dozen agents and weapons drawn? Rather than, say, two guys politely ringing the
191.
by Steuard 10y ago
In my experience, a lot of the cheaters do, in fact, believe (or want to believe) that just about everyone else is doing it too. Don't buy it. I wasn't aware of anyone in my circle of friends or even friendly acquaintances who che
192.
by Steuard 10y ago
If you read the post, you'll see that Carroll means it in a specific and experimentally precise sense: not that "physics is finished", but simply that we have experimentally ruled out the possibility of interactions beyond th
193.
by Steuard 10y ago
I think you're both right. Carroll is claiming that in physics, there is one essentially complete layer of description that we fully understand: the layer consisting of the standard model (based on quantum field theory) plus general
194.
by Steuard 10y ago
I like your example of protein folding! (It's a frightfully difficulty problem, but nobody expects that understanding it will require us to first understand dark matter and the origin of neutrino mass. Well-understood chemistry by itse
195.
by Steuard 10y ago
My understanding of Carroll's point here is that if we were to revisit this question in 2110, there is absolutely no reason to suspect that the ultimate explanation for superconductivity would have turned out to have required any funda
196.
by Steuard 10y ago
This is very true, and it's absolutely something that we don't understand. But Carroll's point in this blog post is simply that we have no reason to think that the ultimate answer to these questions will require some fundamen
197.
by Steuard 10y ago
The 3-sigma that you're quoting may not account for the "look elsewhere" effect: the possibility that a comparable fluctuation might have occurred in any number of other energy levels or other decay channels. It's really
198.
by Steuard 10y ago
As noted, angry sex isn't my thing, but hey, everybody's got their own kink. I wasn't trying to advocate banning it at all! But I would think that it really ought to fall under the heading of "needs a safeword". Oth
199.
by Steuard 10y ago
Thanks for answering: I appreciate it. I'll admit that that notion is pretty foreign to me: "unenthusiastic" is pretty antithetical to "awesome" in my book (not just when it comes to sex). But setting aside the &quo
200.
by Steuard 10y ago
If someone is into BDSM or some sort of role playing that doesn't line up with my own (admittedly vanilla) vision, good for them. But everyone I've known who's into that scene takes an even stronger position on consent than t
201.
by Steuard 10y ago
I literally cannot imagine amazing sex that doesn't easily pass the threshold of "affirmative consent". As I quoted elsewhere in the thread, the definition that pops up on Google reads, "Affirmative consent is a knowing,
202.
by Steuard 10y ago
I feel like you're framing this as enormously more complicated than it needs to be. As I understand it, within the affirmative consent framework it is fine to move toward escalating as long as your partner has sufficient chance to sign
203.
by Steuard 10y ago
You've built the answer to your question into its premise: "a woman changes his mind", you said. So sure: she changed his mind, and thus the sex was consensual. No rape involved, and I don't think I've ever met anyo
204.
by Steuard 10y ago
In answer to your initial questions, yes? To all of them? If you're sitting close to someone you're attracted to and you turn to stare into their eyes and they don't smile back or snuggle closer or lick their lips or do so
205.
by Steuard 10y ago
It doesn't have to be verbal! I'd consider a big grin while pulling your partner into position to be a perfectly lovely form of affirmative consent, just for instance. (That's why it's not called "verbal consent&quo
206.
by Steuard 10y ago
Without question, yes! That's the whole point.
207.
by Steuard 11y ago
Years ago, I had intense debates with my mother about the Monica Lewinsky case. I made essentially the same point you're making here: that focusing on the power imbalance stripped Lewinsky of her agency as an adult woman. My mother&#x2
208.
by Steuard 11y ago
It feels to me like you're conflating general "office romances" with the more narrow "supervisor/employee romances". I've been focused entirely on the latter (which fits the main topic here: senior faculty
209.
by Steuard 11y ago
I agree that once it has worked out for folks, it's hard to say, "You shouldn't have done that." But aren't there still costs? Everyone else in the company now gets to wonder whether the lower-ranking person's
210.
by Steuard 11y ago
If they're flirting with someone who they can fire, or hit with a damaging performance review? (Or an unjustly flattering one, for that matter.) Absolutely I'd tell them to knock it off. The possibility of things sometimes going r

More ›