41

General Science / Re: How does ChatGPT work?

« on: 03/03/2024 05:01:29 »

As a seasoned ChatGPT user, you're familiar with the insights and assistance a single Language Model can provide

So far, no evidence of insight, just uncritical mashups of stuff that's already out there.

Tell that to those who've just got laid off from their jobs, related to increasing use of AI.

42

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: What is included in a configuration space?

« on: 01/03/2024 19:44:43 »

Hi.

   I've probably had enough time to answer my own question.

    The formal definition of "configuration" for a system where only classical mechanics will be used is just the position of every particle in the system.    It doesn't seem to matter in the slightest if the system is fully described just by positions or not.
    So the "configuration space" is just the space of all possible positions of the particles.

    The forum was still useful.   Just trying to write out the question or problem precisely actually helps to formulate what the resolutions may be.   So thank you to everyone.

Definition 2.2.1. The set of all possible (in principle) instantaneous configurations for a
given physical system is known as configuration space. We will denote it by C.
It is important to note that this includes positions, but it does not include velocities.
One informal way of thinking about configuration space is as the space of all distinct
photographs one can take of the system, at least in principle.
     [Taken from some lecture notes for Durham University:  https://www.maths.dur.ac.uk/users/inaki.garcia-etxebarria/MPII/ch/2.2a.pdf  ]
     The article does go on to emphasise that configuration and configuration space is not sufficent to describe the dynamics of most systems and therefore is woefully inadequate to fully describe what I would have considered "the state" of the system.   Thus, making the definition of "generalised co-ordinates" given in Wikipedia essentially misleading.

From WIki (and given in the earlier post):
In analytical mechanics, generalized coordinates are a set of parameters used to represent the state of a system in a configuration space.
   If you took away the last few words in red, the definition is just plain wrong.  Knowing the generalised co-ordinates for a system is simply inadequate to know the state of the system.   If you leave the words in red, then it's unhelpful because you have only a circular definition since the term "configuration space" is only defined by reference to generalised co-ordinates in Wiki.

Best Wishes.

43

Science Experiments / Re: Science practicals-Ideas, suggestions and alternatives.

« on: 01/03/2024 17:24:41 »

I got 20...U still up for it?

: )

Since he hasn't posted anything in about 3 years, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

44

Just Chat! / Re: Is Category Theory the well of mathematical philosophy

« on: 01/03/2024 06:45:03 »

Mathematicians will always be keen to identify what their most fundamental mathematical objects must be.   Physicist's are keen to know what their most fundamental physical object or "atoms" would be, mathematicians are much the same.

Well ok. It does seem to be the case that Category Theory has been hailed a success. It isn't "there" yet, likely since nobody knows where "there" is. But I would say it's at least as successful as modern Information Theory, with it's languages and finite state machines to go with. That is, information entropy is also an algebraic entity, no surprise there really because information is not a continuous field. Ahem.

The continuous part of IT is about communicating the stuff, and the Categorists want IT to be understood as part of their lexicon. I don't see a problem. Someone tell me there isn't a problem (just kidding)

It is simple and Mathematicians are probably only working with and manipulating a very small class or category of structures, all built from what are probably just a small set of atomic objects.

Indeedly. I wrote down a really nice way to construct a tensor product of group algebras, the groups are the symmetric groups namely S₂, and S₁. This is the trivial case, so you start down the path of induction into larger symmetric groups. There is a vector space that uses an S₃ "distinguished" basis, i.e. you have the blindingly obvious (i.e. simple) {1,2}x{1} = {1,2,3}, a "set product", this is also pretty nice. Some permutation diagrams since I want the basis {1,2,3} and Perm{1,2,3}, the set of permutations.

All this is succinctly represented in some diagrams, with vertical and horizontal composition corresponding to inner "vector" and tensor multiplication, resp. with restrictions on the sets. You also invoke the categories Ind and Res as cocategories, it's like a one-page construction of a bunch of highly simplified mathematical thingies.

So yeah, let the good times roll

p.s. I didn't mention that it's been like the way I've kept my keyboard and guitar skills, through self learning. I'm self learning "higher" algebra, and discovering it isn't so hard. It is though, a bit like telling yourself to ignore that voice that says you won't do it.

45

Chemistry / Re: Making Your Own Gas Mask.

« on: 29/02/2024 11:09:13 »

It intrigues me that something as seemingly mundane as 'activated charcoal' appears to be a universal barrier against all poisons. I would have expected a fresh race to find a new high-tech protection against each new poison.

Aviators have a saying:

"These things will not save your life: the sky above you, the runway behind you, the fuel you left in the truck, and anything that happened yesterday."

"It's better to be down here wishing you were up there, than up there wishing you were down here." (Good for fellwalking, too)
"There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are very few old bold pilots."

46

Just Chat! / Re: Is there a universal moral standard?

« on: 29/02/2024 09:49:06 »

Some even willing to sacrifice self and their own family for the greater good of their tribe or nation.

I would never discourage anyone from sacrificing himself. I will happily kill anyone who wants to sacrifice me, or indeed anyone else. There's a big difference.

To quote General Patton: "No goddam sonofabitch ever won a war by dying for his country. You win a war by making your enemy die for his country."

47

Chemistry / Making Your Own Gas Mask.

« on: 29/02/2024 09:47:42 »

When I was in HS chemistry class, our teacher once told us a story. He fought in WWII and he often told us war stories. He said one time he and his fellow soldiers were in a battle. And their sergeant turned them and said, listen this is a gas attack. We don't have time to go back and get our gas masks. So urinate in to your hankies, cover your faces and run fast. Also, when I was still in HS, the Dow Chemical Bhopal gas tragedy occurred. I still remember, the government in India told people there, if your are still in an area with poisonous gas, saturate a large bath towel with water. Then lay on the floor and cover your whole head with it until it is safe.

Why is a cloth saturated with water considered a good filter and impromptu gas mask against some pretty dangerous airborne chemicals sometimes? Just water is involved, not even charcoal. Chemically, how would a gas mask like that even work?

48

Just Chat! / Re: Is Category Theory the well of mathematical philosophy

« on: 29/02/2024 02:07:55 »

Hi.

Anyways, does anyone here have any interest in this stuff

     Some interest but not a lot of expertise, sorry.

or some understanding of how far it all goes, this attempt to codify all mathematical objects and relations between them?

      Mathematicians will always be keen to identify what their most fundamental mathematical objects must be.   Physicist's are keen to know what their most fundamental physical object or "atoms" would be, mathematicians are much the same.

or how doing this appears to simplify things considerably, in that mathematics is actually mind bogglingly simple?

   It is simple and Mathematicians are probably only working with and manipulating a very small class or category of structures, all built from what are probably just a small set of atomic objects.
    On the other hand, the English language is just 26 different characters with some rules on how to combine them - how much more simple can you get?   Yet, you can still generate propaganda that will start wars between nations, poetry that can help to end them and works of philosophy that examines the most profound issues of existence.    Computers require only two atomic elements, a 0 (or "false", "off", or whatever you wish to call it) and a 1.  With that they can capture and display photographs or the audio from an orchestra,  or seemingly understand and respond to questions as demonstrated by ChatGPT.
     How many different categories or types of structures do you think we would need?

Best Wishes.

49

Technology / Re: How is electrolysis of water done safely?

« on: 29/02/2024 01:11:19 »

I recall a TV prog (might have been Open Uni, can't remember) about an industrial accident at a dockyard. They were working on a ship in dry dock using pneumatic power tools and couldn't connect them because the hose connectors were the wrong type. After changing the connectors they got on with the job, and noticed that their fags were burning unusually fast, but thought nothing of it. It wasn't until after the explosion that they found out that the reason the hoses wouldn't fit the unions was that they were connecting them to the oxygen supply instead of the compressed air.

50

New Theories / Re: What caused inflation?

« on: 29/02/2024 00:28:11 »

Hi.

    We may need to take some care when developing a model with virtual particles.  You've taken a notion that is far from certain and was originally intended only to serve as a picture to simplify explanations and then you've run as far as you can with that illustration.
    When PopSci articles describe things they do tend to use phrases like "virtual particles" because it's easier for most people to imagine something in terms of particles doing something.    "Virtual particles" may be nothing more than a metaphor, simplified model or just an illustration of an idea.    In much the same way that gravity isn't a rubber sheet that gets stretched when a planet rests on top of it even though this representation is shown in many diagrams, virtual particles are just something happening in quantum fields.    It can be helpful to imagine interactions as an exchange of virtual particles but most experts stop short of declaring that virtual particles would actually be exactly like some sort of real particle.

The first thing you need to know is that virtual particles ...  ...aren't really particles at all.  The language makes people misunderstand 
   2nd paragraph,  New Scientist,  Why virtual particles don't exist but do explain reality,   https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25834383-000-why-virtual-particles-dont-exist-but-do-explain-reality-for-now/

The term (virtual particle) is somewhat loose and vaguely defined....   ....The accuracy and use of virtual particles in calculations is firmly established, but as they cannot be detected in experiments, deciding how to precisely describe them is a topic of debate.
     Wikipedia.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle

Best Wishes.

51

New Theories / Re: What caused inflation?

« on: 28/02/2024 19:06:29 »

"What caused inflation?" Bad monetary policy obviously (sorry!!)

52

New Theories / Re: Universal Utopia? What's The Universal Terminal Goal?

« on: 28/02/2024 15:21:00 »

something that we do will make our successors' lives easier

Very simply, make fewer babies. Everybody wins.

53

Chemistry / Re: Is halogenation of alkynes with propylene glycol possible?

« on: 28/02/2024 12:30:46 »

Hi.

    I'm also not finding many references to the anaesthetic properties of the compound    1,3 dichloro propan 2-ol.

     There almost certainly are some adverse effects from e-cigarette vaping but it's not clear that  PG  is the biggest concern.   The "flavourings" that are added are sometimes considered as big a risk as anything else.    However, as you ( @smart ) have indicated, there is a small concern about the production of new compounds created during the heating and vapourisation process that were not present in the original liquid.  PG may contribute to the production of these new compounds.

    Some information is here:   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507184/
Their assessment of the risks of PG inhalation were quite low.

Best Wishes.

Dear Eternal Student...

Thank you for this update. Glycerol halogenation is likely to happen without the need of fluorine or any specific secondary alcohol/ether. Hydroxyl radicals can substitute themselves for a halogen tautomer in presence of propylene glycol acting as a eletrophilic reagent. I am deeply sorry for this unintended confusion about 1,3-DCP.

In contrast, the real problem seems to be with glycerol halogenation of propylene glycol which produces 1,3-DHA (please see link below). Lastly, please note that TEMPO was used as a reagent in the study for simulating free radical based synthesis of DHA, a glycerol derivative.

I hope this helps,
smart

Method and process is here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040403906015401

54

New Theories / Re: How close are we from building a virtual universe?

« on: 27/02/2024 17:47:11 »

If a system is a compressed version of itself, it will eventually disappear up its own orifice. 

55

General Science / Is a man-made afterlife possible?

« on: 27/02/2024 12:01:32 »

Do any of you feel it is possible for our conscience to be allocated to a machine to survive our bodily death? Obviously, if this is indeed possible, the person would have to be alive during the transfer. An instant, unexpected death, will vaporize our consciousness into the "ether" never to return. Personally, im 100% content with my awareness ending at death. When i'm gone, i'm gone.

56

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: If Red Light cures everything, why aren't hospital lightbulbs red?

« on: 27/02/2024 01:04:00 »

Hi.

    Some of the phrases in that article you linked to include:

more research is necessary to fully determine its potential benefits. ;

it's important to keep in mind that many of the published studies using red light as therapy are often small (less than 30 people), animal or lab studies. As a result, most medical professionals agree that more quality research with more human participants is needed.;

They're not dramatic treatments, ;

    You should also add your own experience and assessment of Magazine or website articles.   No one wants to write an article that says "there's not much evidence here".... you can sell more if you are able to say  "there may be some effect here".
    However, some of article was interesting.    The problems of wound healing in zero-G environments and the possible use of red light was interesting and not something I was previously aware of.   Apparently this has been identified many years ago and there are quite a few articles about this already.  Here's a short one:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16322053-100-space-healing/

why are hospital lights still white?

I don't know and I'm not an expert.   These reasons seem sensible:

    (i) There isn't enough evidence for the benficial effects yet.
    (ii)  You need to do more with the light than just heal surface skin injuries.  Patients want to read a book.   Older and partially sighted people want to be able to walk to the bathroom without crashing into obstacles.   Nurses want to be able to see skin rashes in a natural white light not some low intensity red light   etc.
    (iii)   Red is an inherently low-energy and hence low-intensity light.   It's not bright or easy to see with.   It's not cheerful or motivating to get up and do something - like a jigsaw puzzle in the day room etc.    Keeping patients optimistic and motivated is at least as important for getting them well as healing their minor skin complaints.
      (iv) As mentioned in your Forbes article, if you had very powerfull red light emitters all along the hospital wards, then you would also need to issue eye protection to every patient, nurse, doctor, visitor etc.

Let's also do something similar to that magazine article and close with a nugget of information:

  Did you Know?         There already is some red light in white light.   

Best Wishes.

57

New Theories / Re: How close are we from building a virtual universe?

« on: 26/02/2024 15:10:53 »

you may haven't heard about fractals or recursion.

Everyone has. But no system can simulate itself because as soon as it has done so, it contains a new simulation that it hasn't simulated! 

58

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can plutonium exist naturally in the universe?

« on: 25/02/2024 23:19:51 »

Hi.

    All the heavy elements were once thought to have been made in Supernova explosions.   In principle any element you can think of, some of that could be made under the conditions of a supernova.

    More recently it's been thought that supernovae aren't the only place where heavy elements are made.   Modern conjecture is that most heavy elements are made during neutron star mergers and this may actually be the main Astronomical process that produces most of the heavy elements.

    There are also some more possibilities that exist on our own planet rather then out in space and under extreme conditions.   There is a region known as the Oklo natural reactor - this is essentially some caves in Gabon, Africa that were rich in Uranium isotopes and used to flood with water.  The water acted as a moderator and you effectively had a natural nuclear reactor.   The Uranium isotopes mainly involved in the natural fission reactions would have been U-235 but natural Uranium is always a mixture of isotopes.  So the U-239 that was present would absorb neutrons and follow the usual path to form Plutonium just as in a man-made nuclear reactor.    Analysis of the rocks from the Oklo natural reactor did reveal higher than average concentrations of Plutonium.   Nature made some Plutonium all on its own right here on our planet.

In 1972, chemical analysis showed an unusually low concentration of uranium-235 in the ore mined in the Oklo open pit mine. However, there were high concentrations of elements like cesium, curium, americium and even plutonium to be found.   
[Taken from  https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbressan/2018/08/14/two-billion-year-old-natural-reactor-may-holds-key-for-safe-nuclear-waste-disposal/ ]

Best Wishes.

59

Just Chat! / Re: Where do I get my confidence to challenge established theories?

« on: 24/02/2024 14:37:01 »

I agree with Alan that Hamdani behaves in a gentlemanly manner despite my disagreement with his technical arguments. On the subject of Tesla and his quotes I disagree. Tesla was a brilliant engineer but he was totally out of touch with the rapidly advancing scientific knowledge of his era and this situation worsened with time.

Which technical arguments do you think that I got wrong?

To maintain order, IMO it would be better to discuss technical issues in their respective threads. As far as possible, here we'll discuss non-technical things only.

Mockery is a Terrible Tactic for Changing Minds

Sure, there are hard targets out there, but in the one-on-one exchanges about identity beliefs, there's likely a better way. Here's a clip by educator Melanie Trecek-King of www.thinkingispower.com..

let's use a better way.

60

Just Chat! / Re: Would some of you I have never met please introduce yourselves to me?

« on: 24/02/2024 12:02:28 »

Hi.

I find myself not knowing many of you who are posting and would greatly love making your acquaintances.

    I'm sorry I missed this post when it was new.

I have no objection to disclosing some information about myself but it's mainly dull and of lttle interest to anyone else. 

Easily obtained information:
You ( @Karen W. ) have posted 20 542 times on the "Just Chat" section looking at the summary statistics, so this is your preferred territority of the forum.   You also use a lot of green ink.

Something I've noticed:
    Many of your posts focus on people and how they are. 

My heart cries out in anguish, and tears of bitter pain,
at the loss of those who have been taken, by those who seem insane..
    [Living for a better tomorrow,  Karen Wavri,  2023,   https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=1998.msg712430#msg712430 ]

 You also created and participated in several posts that were mainly just for the involvement or entertainment of other people.    E.g. you frequently contributed to the A-Z of science thread.

You've been heard and noticed, Karen.   Thank you for making the forum a better place.   You've disclosed in several posts that you're unwell and I'm sure that we all wish you well.

Best Wishes.