🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@klonoavirus lol

@curt :) only one is correct :)

@curt huh?

@vovanium thats a multiplication sign :)

@valleyforge yes, yes you are.

@klonoavirus It is the correct answer.

Lol i snorted

@Feddylain dual is a technical proper math term check out ""Pontryagin Duals"

@Feddylain not sure what weird induction circuits you mean, probably not..

It is somewhat related to the fact that the electric and magnetic fields are duals of each other, but goes beyond that. in to a way of thinking most electrical engineers rarely do (and many wouldnt even think is correct)...

Basically in a typical electric circuit wires have low resistance (made of copper) and the elelectric field propagates through it (voltage), and produces current, which has the side effect of producing magnetic fields.

In a magnetic circuit all of that is replaced with its dual. Instead of having a power sorce that produces an electromotive force, like a batter, youd have a power source that produces a magnetomotive force, like a spinning magnet, or a magnet with a collapsing magnetic field... the wires would no longer need to be low resistance, they can in fact have high resistance, but instead would need to have low reluctance. Instead of the electric field propagating through the wires the magnetic field would propagate through it, etc.

I've been meaning to do a write up explaining duality in electronic circuits. Specifically in a way you dont hear about covering, for example, the duality between an electric circuit and a magnetic circuit.... I've been knee deep in refreshing myself on mostly the vocab I need to explain this properly and what exactly is a dual and how there are different types of duals that vary what is a dual based on the context, which itself goes back to laplace transforms... man my head is spinning though because im really trying to think of concepts I know well in a very foreign way.

@cowanon Not all heroes wear capes :)

@cowanon

https://theconversation.com/i-study-viruses-how-our-team-isolated-the-new-coronavirus-to-fight-the-global-pandemic-133675#:~:text=Isolating%20a%20virus%20requires%20collecting,replicate%20and%20multiply%20in%20cells.

@cowanon We wouldn't have its precise RNA sequence if we hadn't

@cowanon Would make sense if it weren't for the fact that it has.

@bonifartius

Generally speaking, yes, that is the difference..I agree I dont want scientist building bridges anymore than I want engineers defining bridge building theory. The issue I find is that the separation of concerns here might mean that engineers are better at building bridges, yes, but not as good as they could be at doing so. Similarly it means scientists are better at defining bridge building theories but not as good as they would be.

Ideally there would be no distinction in education (just in how they want to apply their education) and people who build bridges would be experts in the theory and the application, as would the people defining the theories.

Now for bridges it isnt as big a deal because building new novel types of bridges that behave in radically different ways than we are used to is something that almost never happens, so the separation there isnt as critical as it is in other fields where dealing with edge cases are more common place such as computer and electrical engineering.

@namark

@namark

No worries, I'm not very easily insulted anyway. I'd rather you be honest and mean than dishonest and kind. Even if i dont always agree with your opinions they are still your genuine opinions so I'm ok with it.

@bonifartius

@namark

If that were the case I would have kicked you to the curb ages ago.

@bonifartius

@namark

I certainly could have been more explicit. But saying "engineers" rather than "some engineers" no more implies all engineers than ti does some, it is ambiguous in that regard.

I think the most reasonable interpretation, and in fact the one I meant, would be "most engineers". I think people would be grasping if they took what i said and insisted that i meant every single engineer without an exception in the world. I think most would take it to mean exactly what I intended, that engineers understanding the deeper theory is a rarity.

@bonifartius