Show newer

If you never watched the clip about Dr. Feynman explaining the nature of a "why" question please watch this. It is probably one of the most important things a critical thinker could ever know if they dont already:

youtu.be/36GT2zI8lVA

This video started a good discussion over on my friends feed. So far no one has answered it and I dont want to give away the answer to anyone else (please CW your answers) but the question is this:

Why is it when you burn a piece of steel wool it gets heavier, but if you burn a log it gets lighter.

stux⚡️  
When you burn steel wool, it gets heavier.

I saw the following question on FB where I answered it Thought I'd share teh question and answer here:

How long it takes to absorb and re-emit a photon when an electron's trajectory gets changed?

----------------------

After a free electron in space is effected by a photon it will, as you suggested, accelerate. But after taht point it is no different than any other electron with a constant velocity moving through space.

Now for starters there is a fundemental mistake in your thinking. Free electrons can not absord a photon, not in the usual sense. The only way an electron can be effected by a photon is through compton scattering, in which case the electron will absorb part of a photon, change its wave length and the energy absorbed will cause some degree of recoil, so the electron will accelerate. After that point, as I said the electron will be no different than any other electron moving at constant velocity through space.

To answer your question as to when they will emmit a photon, well, just as they can not absorb photons in the free space, they also can not spontaniously emit them. What can happen however is inverse compton scattering. This is where a very fast (usually relativistic) electron interacts with a low energy photon and imparts some of its energy to the photon increasing the energy of the photon and ultimately slowing down the speed of the electron.

So the answer to your question is, never, or whenever the right photon comes by, whichever applies to the circumstances.

The hexane just arrived for the CBD to THC synthesis lan ill be showing sometime later this week!

When I read things like this my first thought is "Post hoc ergo propter hoc"?

While I do think cannabis may induce anxiety it could very well be that those prone to anxiety are the ones more likely to consume cannabis in the first place. there is no way of knowing from this set of data which direction the association goes.

this is why double-blind studies are always critical and any conclusions drawn from data that is not double-blind in nature should be considered highly suspect.

Clarke's Three laws (#2 is my favorite):

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Everyone, share with me your favorite STEM Textbooks! Bonus points if it has a sexy formatting/typesetting :)

Which STEM Professional organizations do you all belong to that publish a peer-reviewed journal, and share if you have published or contributed to the peer review journal before...

I'll start.

I am a member of the following:

IEEE
ACM
ASIS&T

I have collaborated on papers and contributed to the peer review process before.

I think I want to refresh my Quantum Mechanics skills.I have a text book "The mathematics of Quantum Mechanics" that I am tempted to go over. Its been a few years since I did any QM seriously and I think I lost some of my understanding.

If I do a demonstration on how to convert CBD into THC (semisynthesis) what would be the most interesting way for me to present that?

Would anyone be interested in me posting a write up, or even a video, of how to do a semi-synthesis of THC from CBD? Its one of the more fun chemistry experiments IMO and can be done from home. Thankfully I'm in a location where it would be legal as well.

I feel like linear algebra should have a common operation, like transpose, that basically takes a Nx1 or 1xN vector and diagonalizes it (turns it into a NxN vector with the values across the diagonal)

I got bored so i wanted to see if we could remember how to represent a multilayer perceptron using linear algebra. I think i summed it up fairly well.

Ya know... looking back on the various algorithms I invented I'm not really sure how much of it is luck (trial and error) and how much of it comes from knowledge (math, algorithms, etc)... I have invented a few fairly well used algorithms that are novel and performant that were systematic trial and error in the end and don't resemble my original plans on paper at all. I have others that are a mathematical symphony that just git together well from the first go.

Then again I only create new algorithms when I'm learning new ideas or revisiting them, usually inspired by the thought process it takes for me to understand an idea and apply it in other somewhat abstract ways. So maybe invention is just an extension of learning in a way. Afterall i often find when I am learning I try to predict the next logical step, such as with math. Which is sort of like inventing the idea yourself if you haven't turned the page in the textbook yet to get the answer.

Perhaps the people who are inventors of anything are also the ones who learn through exploration rather than just repetition.

Show older
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.