00:01:08 Is there any FPGA/CPLD where the software to program it is built-in to the device itself instead of requiring a PC? 00:03:52 (still it does sound like "oh btw, did I mention the bridge you've been walking on for the last few years has never been tested? It could potentially collapse at any moment.") 00:04:27 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum hth >:) 00:05:13 In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory, a false vacuum is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastability sector of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space that appears to be a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_state, but is unstable due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instanton effects that may http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling to a lower energy state. 00:05:19 thanks wikipedia, that explains a lot 00:05:32 ...what kind of copy/paste is that. 00:06:11 uhm I've been using colloquy for a couple weeks and its behaviour is often... unexpected 00:06:13 the introduction is not very helpful. 00:08:03 I'm trying very hard to believe that what follow is 00:08:14 ...i guess not. 00:08:37 try the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schild%27s_Ladder link in there instead. 00:16:15 i think the part about it being in quantum field theory may be a red herring to understanding what a false vacuum is 00:20:18 that _does_ tend to hide the sheer horror of it under incomprehensible math, yes. 00:21:46 ok well see you 00:21:53 bye 00:22:03 and thanks for all the interesting new stuff 00:22:11 it all sounds so fun all these big words 00:22:31 http://www.sheldoncomics.com/archive/120914.html :P 00:22:31 -!- Arc_Koen has quit (Quit: that's dr. turing to you, punk). 00:24:48 thats a pretty good comic 00:26:03 Can this be used to make a program on microcontrollers (and on the FPGA itself) to do dynamic programming on FPGA? http://dfusion.com.au/wiki/tiki-index.php?page=AT40K+Bitstream+Format 00:26:50 oerjan: well this is the problem with the universe http://www.sheldoncomics.com/archive/120907.html 00:27:58 dora is the healthy one 00:32:00 and heres what the comic points to 00:32:24 i just happened to have open http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox 00:33:42 so the thing of it is, if one package can be unique, with a special recipient and a magical journey 00:34:19 if you add more packages, at what point do they cease to be unique, and on magical journeys 00:36:06 i imagine that talkshow hosts feel the same way about celebrities 00:40:55 or, help me my brain starts learning every time i attend lectures.. but they have hooked me up to youtube lecture streams as in a clockwork orange (i admit i dont want to learn) 00:56:17 ...thank you for making me regret pasting that link. 00:56:32 it's just what iti does 00:56:40 yeah, i react like this to everything 00:58:34 on the micro scale i am typing... on the macro scale i am dying 00:59:35 but, can i really treat dying as a verb i am doing? 01:05:18 oerjan: well.. if i bite into a cooke am i doing hysteresis? 01:05:35 ^cookie 01:07:33 haha.. 01:09:24 http://www.amazon.com/Noras-Hair-Salon-Shear-Disaster/product-reviews/B004FK5E8E 01:13:19 that explains a lot 01:21:46 -!- madbr has joined. 01:21:51 http://www.sumotorrent.com/en/details/6113662/Noras Hair Salon 3 Shear Disaster 2011 DVDRip XviD-ph2.html 01:25:07 watch this movie for us itidus21 01:28:36 in another universe i did... all that is needed now is to find this other me 01:29:48 and so began the quest to find another universe 01:43:14 shachaf: in context "everything" meant "everything in the real world" 01:43:27 we did discuss the arithmetic hierarchy later, though 01:43:51 also, how goes? 01:46:13 * shachaf is back in the bay area. 01:47:00 the bay of biscay? 01:47:14 Is there any other? 01:51:26 bagel area 01:52:30 * shachaf probably ought to figure out what to do next. 01:53:00 -!- quintopia has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 02:07:21 what would a 32 bit version of the 6502 look like 02:10:56 dogs playing poker 02:11:36 a 32-bit processor with only 3 registers would be amusing 02:12:11 That's basically x86, isn't it? 02:12:18 c.c 02:12:32 ahah :D 02:12:41 So that's why it's called 386 02:12:55 86 is kinda half way between a z80 and an ARM 02:13:50 > 86*2-80 -- ARM? 02:13:51 92 02:15:03 IPv4 is running out. 02:15:16 i am a strong believer in path dependance in PC hardware..(was just reading about the word path dependance) and i have tried to rant about it in some places i think 02:15:53 Is itidus21 a bot? 02:16:25 fungot, what do you think about path dependence? 02:16:26 Jafet: http://www.scheme.com/ tspl2d/ fnord the hopes of fixing the font problem, is what i'm saying is it's trivial to write 02:16:50 no 02:17:35 fungot should have a mode like sourbot_ where you can seed it with a word. 02:17:35 shachaf: if i want. 02:17:42 fungot: you want. 02:17:42 shachaf: it's time to poof. it's like fnord 02:17:51 ^style 02:17:52 Available: agora alice c64 ct darwin discworld europarl ff7 fisher fungot homestuck ic irc* iwcs jargon lovecraft nethack pa qwantz sms speeches ss wp youtube 02:17:54 fungot 02:17:54 itidus21: hyphens or not. listening ( reading) feels uncomfortable because i suppose i could 02:17:56 fungot 02:17:56 itidus21: ( that's cl, though, if i let it loose in e.g. his fnord book " combinatory logic" is stupid? try using poc. 02:17:57 fungot 02:17:58 itidus21: but stuff like fnord. and here, " i", a book on my head as something i can never remember which argument i'm allowed to do ' korsossa' a module system, 02:18:00 I think fungot wants to talk about fnord. 02:18:01 Jafet: you're probably part of a type does not exist in your paste is an example line of code that is either working or very close 02:18:09 Jafet: Are you an op in here? 02:18:19 Uhh, am I, fungot? 02:18:20 Jafet: and check with xev what keys are bound to a procedure in the procedure's scope. if you 02:18:29 I think he says no. 02:19:38 shachaf: i think for example PC's don't need to be based on circuit boards. 02:20:23 then again that may be because i don't realize what all that stuff on circuit boards does 02:21:21 -!- nortti has quit (Read error: Operation timed out). 02:25:18 basically i think pc's are too upgrade focused.. i think that the machines could possibly be more efficient if you just ordered one efficient mass of electrical components which didn't care about space or extensability 02:25:36 ^extensibility 02:27:56 They don't *have* to be based on circuitboards, and indeed the bulk of the circuitry isn't actually on a board (it's in the chips), but boards are easy to manufacture and design. 02:29:26 right, circuit boards are still used even on computers not meant to be upgradeable 02:29:33 like the macbook air and "ultrabooks" 02:29:35 also cell phones, etc 02:29:53 humm.. ok ill skip onto my next point then. 02:29:57 there's a tremendous fixed cost to engineering a bunch of stuff together onto one chip 02:29:59 -!- nortti has joined. 02:30:03 you only do it if you're selling a bajillion of something 02:30:16 you try to buy standard parts and integrate them at board level 02:30:18 itidus21, look up 'system on a chip' though, it's basically what you were talking about. 02:30:30 Apple sells a bajillion iphones and cares very much about making them thin, light, poer-efficient, etc. 02:30:33 so they design some custom chips 02:30:40 They should release a new dip called "system on a chip". 02:31:14 that would sell well among people who were on a good salary 02:31:35 Even then you'll still need a board to solder USB ports etc. onto. 02:31:55 itidus21: you can make an AVR microprocessor blink prime numbers to an LED with only the chip, a battery, a resistor, and the LED 02:31:58 no circuit board 02:33:53 like if they sat down (as they always do before working) and decided to do a design which incorporated all the parts of a pc in one dependant design 02:34:05 sometimes they have standing desks 02:35:25 kmc, how often do you think Clojure people copy Haskell stuff without realizing that Clojure functions can do things that Haskell functions can't? 02:35:27 i imagine they could cut down on bus latency if they had enough design freedom 02:35:49 kmc: You'd only do that if you were really board. 02:37:34 itidus21 are you an electrical engineer now 02:38:38 i'm a cosmology professor 02:40:06 kmc: no.. >.< 02:41:49 itidus21: it is pretty common these days to combine multiple semiconductor dies into a single package that a circuit board designer would call "a chip" 02:42:05 e.g. processor and ram stacked together into a single package with a single set of legs (well, more likely, balls) to talk to the outside world 02:43:02 that is a level of integration between die-level and board-level 02:43:16 AMD makes this 12-core CPU which is basically just two of their 6-core CPUs stuck together in one package which fits in one socket 02:43:28 we had a box with 4 of those at my last job... it was pretty sick 02:43:47 the other day i heard someone argue that cpu is a bottleneck and gpu is not... that sparked this train of thought that they are mad 02:44:00 it depends on what you're doing... 02:44:06 yeah @_@ 02:44:11 it does.. 02:44:16 for bitcoin mining the GPU is the only important component 02:44:28 people build boxes with four $500 graphics cards, $20 CPU, $20 of RAM 02:44:46 you don't even need the IO bandwidth to/from the graphics cards 02:44:46 $20 can get you a lot of RAM these days. 02:44:53 * shachaf 's laptop has $40 worth of RAM. 02:45:03 people will cut pins off of the graphics cards so they fit in the slower PCIe x1 slots 02:45:17 that's one extreme 02:48:39 i guess that the form of productivity they are doing with those graphics cards is that they are changing the world by accumulating money 02:49:41 i am not sure of the right wording for this 02:51:05 i'm not sure that kind of bitcoin mining is profitable anymore 02:51:35 Are any other kinds of bitcoin mining profitable? 02:51:41 also even if you accumulate a bunch of bitcoins, the exchange you use to turn them into real money will probably get hacked and you'll lose everything 02:51:55 Not if you turn them into real money first. 02:52:05 -!- madbr has left. 02:53:40 i mean, on some level it is productive to transfer or create money 03:14:26 kmc: hmm.. could it be that some software is best written for gpus then? 03:14:36 uh, yes 03:14:44 some algorithms execute much much faster on GPUs 03:15:00 GPUs have what's called a SIMD architecture: single instruction, multiple data 03:15:03 my understanding is that most software runs exclusively on cpus 03:15:13 meaning that you can operate on a lot of data at once, if you're doing the same thing to each piece of data 03:15:44 humm 03:16:03 they could call them something fancy like gpu-apps 03:16:08 in the case of bitcoin mining, you are applying the same hash function (double SHA256) to a lot of different inputs 03:16:30 trying to find an input such that the output has a certain unusual property 03:16:59 regardless of the viability of the currency, the core bitcoin idea of using hash chaining as a distributed timestamp service is really fucking clever 03:17:15 one of the coolest new ideas i've heard in computer science in the past few years 03:18:07 Isn't that what hashcash does? 03:18:27 At least in the "searching for input where output has X propert" thing 03:18:57 Ugh, GitHub for Windows has an ugly metro-ish UI 03:20:09 maybe some compilers should have a -gpu parameter 03:21:09 Sgeo: hmm, it does use hashing for proof of work 03:21:19 but it doesn't provide a distributed timestamp service or anything so fancy 03:21:47 the bitcoin protocol lets you establish cryptographically that you had a specific piece of data at a specific time 03:21:54 without anyone trusting a central entity 03:22:02 which seems useful beyond cryptocurrency 03:22:18 there's an application to naming (namecoin) and there would seem to be applications to intellectual property, etc 03:22:24 ok i see its called gpgpu 03:36:27 -!- FreeFull has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 03:38:45 -!- FreeFull has joined. 03:39:12 -!- copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.). 03:41:43 -!- DHeadshot has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 03:41:48 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 03:42:33 -!- DHeadshot has joined. 03:46:56 For algorithms which execute much faster on GPUs, is that what Checkout esolang is for? 03:52:29 -!- DHeadshot has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 03:53:07 zzo38: i think so 03:57:15 -!- augur has joined. 03:57:32 APPLY LAMBDA foo APPLY itidus21 03:57:44 something like that.. 03:58:55 what i mean is 03:59:06 you can apply itidus to foo 03:59:25 but i think i said it wrong 04:00:13 -!- invariable has changed nick to variable. 04:00:34 eg, applying itidus21 to ESME results in a country practice 04:01:06 http://www.iwt.net.au/sideprojects/esme-groove.jpg 04:02:03 -!- copumpkin has joined. 04:03:41 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 04:11:29 -!- augur has joined. 04:15:56 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 04:39:09 -!- augur has joined. 04:39:20 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 05:17:21 There exists a language called Smarty. 05:18:06 It's a template language. How boring 05:23:52 -!- augur has joined. 05:31:10 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 05:36:38 hmm, compiler feature idea: if the user supplies code that's incorrectly indented, it just reindents the source as it compiles it 05:37:05 * ais523 is continuing on their crusade to annoy both Python fans and non-Python fans equally with programming language style 05:37:35 I guess if the source is read-only, it'd refuse to compile it unless it were correctly indented already 05:38:00 hehe 05:38:13 well Go has a One True Style which is enforced by some tool 05:38:18 but i don't think it's part of the compiler per se 05:38:41 the idea is that this lets me do other things too 05:38:52 If the user supplies bad code, delete it 05:38:59 like, there'd be an "unreachable" keyword that you can use to mark code that should be unreachable 05:39:10 and if it actually /is/ unreachable, then the compiler comments it out for you with special reversible comments 05:39:31 (and comments it back in again if it turns out to be not unreachable, so your editor's syntax highlighter can warn you) 05:39:50 ais523: you might see zzo38's Checkout question a page or so above 05:45:46 -!- impomatic has joined. 05:46:44 Off-topic, but what's controversial about ais523's UTM? 05:47:25 it uses an infinite tape that's initiated with a complicated pattern 05:48:05 So, the question is whether it's legal to have a pre-initialized tape? 05:48:08 and the question becomes how much of the universality is in the setup and how much is in the actual TM 05:48:16 Wolfram thinks so. 05:48:58 well his rule 110 automaton also used infinite setup, although iiuc that was at least periodic on each side 05:49:57 ("his" in the sense he maybe invented the automaton, not the proof of universality, which he only paid for.) 05:50:31 and then sued the prover when he tried to publish it independently 05:51:11 but i'm personally much more confident on TC-ness when input and output are finite. 05:51:12 I mean the 2,3 machine 05:51:28 mathematicians and their sillyness 05:51:33 Jafet: i'm saying they have the same issue, although the 2,3 machine more so 05:52:06 oerjan: clearly he is so bored in his work that he has time to go around suing people 05:52:31 itidus21: ... you know nothing about wolfram, i take. 05:52:50 he has an ego about 10 sizes bigger than the solar system. 05:53:25 he sued so that it would be first published in his own book, which is full of hype. 05:53:36 ahh that book 05:53:51 or maybe not that book 05:53:58 "a new kind of science" 05:54:17 A kind of nuisance 05:54:55 "Wolfram published an article on particle physics[6] but claimed to be bored and left Eton prematurely in 1976" 05:55:01 ok so he really does get bored.... 05:55:39 Jafet: sorry but you aren't original :P http://www.amazon.com/review/R31DLUYNKIUR0C 05:56:44 11 of 16 people found the following review helpful. but just 1 star. 05:57:59 this one is also interesting http://www.amazon.com/review/B004FK5E8E 05:58:20 Perhaps it is a universal principle that everyone of sufficient complexity tends to make fun of Wolfram. 05:58:45 oh wait it's the reviewer that gives the star. 05:59:16 It occurs to me that Isaac Newton was also a jackass 05:59:47 (Which doesn't make Wolfram comparable to Newton except in that regard) 06:03:34 Wolfram thinks so. ← I used to think this, but I changed my mind; the mathematicians at Wolfram Science who actually /read/ the proof think so 06:03:44 as far as I can tell, Wolfram actually doesn't know and isn't interested 06:04:21 http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~wclark/ANKOS_humor.html 06:05:14 Eh? I thought he did all the actual math at WR. 06:05:32 whatever would make you think that? 06:05:49 -!- drocta has joined. 06:06:08 fwiw, what did you think all the other people at Wolfram Science (or is it Wolfram Research?) actually /do/? 06:08:07 They run around picking up after his brilliant discoveries 06:08:14 heheh 06:08:48 so I made https://github.com/drocta/TILDE-ATH 06:08:51 Sgeo: anyway, the main controversy is whether the initialization is /too/ complex to be considered TC 06:09:18 Hmm....? 06:09:37 Sgeo: a system has two parts, an inference rule and an initial condition, right? 06:09:45 the 2,3 machine has a very very simple inference rule 06:10:05 but in order to get it to emulate an arbitrary Turing machine, you need a very very complex initial condition 06:10:20 and the debate's about whether initial conditions that complex should be "allowed" 06:10:42 IMO, it's obvious that that one should be from an engineering point of view, but mathematicians need precise definitions and they didn't formulate one in advance that applies to this 06:10:55 well it's still a computable initial condition, presumably 06:11:09 and so you still get an initial condition even for a machine which ends up not halting 06:11:14 which is kind of a significant point 06:11:27 kmc: the problem is it's infinitely long 06:11:39 and there are some obvious ways of cheating if you're allowed an infinitely long infinite condition 06:11:49 which? 06:11:49 like "simulate the program, keep printing 0s while you're simulating and 1 if it happens to halt" 06:12:05 that's entirely computable, in that you can compute the first n bits of the initial condition no problem, likewise the nth 06:12:18 and yet it encodes haltingness into the initial condition rather than the actual program 06:12:32 messing with infinities tends to lead to problems in maths 06:12:42 so the approach I'm trying to go down is to generate a finite description of the infinite condition 06:12:49 together with an expansion program that's obviously sub-TC 06:13:00 the last few years have been trying to define "obviously sub-TC" :) 06:13:17 Ideally the condition should be independent of the program. 06:13:28 If you need to mess with infinites then you need to do it properly 06:13:52 or at least, I came up with a definition, http://esolangs.org/wiki/1cnis - but have not been able to prove that that definition fits the initial condition I actually came up with… 06:13:58 So, the MtG UTM manages to encode the infinitely long initial condition somehow? 06:14:00 s/-/–/ 06:14:08 drocta: what is TILDE-ATH? 06:14:13 Sgeo: it doesn't, it just initialises it with blue 06:14:19 I contacted the author about it to explain 06:14:19 And wouldn't MtG's ability to encode the initial condition + ... oh, uh 06:14:21 ~ATH 06:14:22 is 06:14:27 The Magic machine is a straight-up turing machine 06:14:31 With a blank tape (spooler) 06:14:37 infinite both ways 06:14:58 ~ATH is a fictional programming language, in Homestuck (in Homestuck it's real) 06:15:04 spooler alert 06:15:12 yeah, that. 06:15:26 based on loops that continue so long as an object is "alive" 06:15:28 +++ATZ 06:15:37 -!- pikhq has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 06:15:48 I thought it was more triggering on when something's not "alive" 06:15:55 it does both 06:15:59 by the way, #esoteric: #acehack told me about the Magic 2,3 machine before #esoteric did 06:16:02 you must be slipping ;) 06:16:21 ~ATH(VARNAME){loop this while alive}EXECUTE(executethisondeath); 06:16:37 btw, there is actually a mistake in ANKOS that is Wolfram making the same mistake as the Magic machine person made 06:16:40 I told him about it over the phone 06:16:56 ais523: if this was today, then i think #esoteric in fact was a bit earlier 06:16:58 luckily, I'd managed to fix it in my head in a few seconds, so the theorem is correct, just not the proof 06:17:02 oklopol: it was yesterady 06:17:05 *yesterday 06:17:12 okay then i don't know 06:17:13 around midday 06:17:34 And somehow or other there is a valid(?) program with two colors and weird nesting 06:17:38 I had an idea of Magic: the Gathering cards of programming language, once; now, this Magic 2,3 machine can even work without requiring any choices. However, what if you want to make input/output? 06:17:40 my best guess is 4 years ago but possibly also yesterday 06:17:44 -!- pikhq has joined. 06:17:51 also i was eating pizza and then i woke up 06:17:57 yeah, common idea is that the colors were different threads. 06:18:06 `addquote my best guess is 4 years ago but possibly also yesterday 06:18:10 Actually Magic 2,3 machine still require cards to played in a certain way to start, and then it works without any choices. 06:18:15 861) my best guess is 4 years ago but possibly also yesterday 06:18:21 it still has choices of whether to play "may" actions or not 06:18:36 oh 06:18:37 but moving away from that probably means you can't phase the Teysas… 06:18:40 Magic 2,3 machine. 06:18:47 i thought you meant the 2,3 challenge :D 06:19:02 ais523, but the same person proved it with another machine, right? 06:19:14 Sgeo: no, but he said he was working on a 2,18 06:19:17 which I'll be interested in 06:19:19 Oh 06:19:25 I wonder if, something can be made using that, including both input and output? 06:19:30 But as it stands, MtG is NOT proven TC? 06:19:45 (I assume the 2,18 in question is uncontroversial: I haven't seen it, but that seems about the right number of colors for an uncontroversially TC 2-state Turing machine) 06:19:54 but yes, the proof as it stands is flawed 06:20:03 Someone should post that to Reddit 06:21:50 only when it's fixed 06:22:00 so, am i to understand that someone implemented the 2,3 machine in mtg? 06:22:03 oklopol: yes 06:22:08 As in, the fact that the current proof is flawed 06:22:13 Not the 2,18 version 06:22:20 and in what sense was it implemented? 06:22:22 http://www.toothycat.net/~hologram/Turing/HowItWorks.html 06:22:38 oklopol: in the sense that if four players have specially constructed decks and are cooperating with each other 06:22:42 404 06:22:47 ais523: As specified the assumption is the players always take choices offered to them. 06:22:55 then they can set up a gamestate with an infinite series of triggered actions 06:23:05 and if they always take optional choices, it emulates the 2,3 machines 06:23:06 okay now it works dunno what happened 06:23:11 Yeah. 06:23:21 It's an edge case. 06:23:27 Assumping the machine counts. 06:23:48 -!- augur has joined. 06:24:02 clearly we just need to partition Mark Rosewater to make a card that makes all optional abilities compulsory ;) 06:24:26 ais523: Actually I had a similar idea of exactly the same effect, even without reading about the Magic 2,3 machine. 06:24:33 ais523: Surely this'd be *easy*. 06:24:39 I mean, he is a mathematician. 06:25:02 zzo38: somehow I'm not surprised :) 06:26:04 how many cards does it need? 06:26:22 not all /that/ many 06:26:39 although it needs six copies of the same legendary in play at once, which is slightly nontrivial but not impossible to arrange 06:27:01 (you can steal them from other players or copy them, and use a separate card to make having multiple identically-named legendaries in play at once legal) 06:27:02 Is that why the card was made legendary? 06:27:06 If you make the assumption all players are trying to set it up, it's not that much work. 06:27:08 zzo38: I doubt it 06:27:11 pikhq: indeed 06:27:26 we once made this board game which was awesome, you put pieces on the board and a chain reaction was triggered, so you could get multiple points on one turn. 06:27:41 and our record was like 20 or something 06:27:57 then i implemented it on the computer and it inflooped after 5 turns and got infinity points. 06:28:23 In a Limited game, if you manage to draft (or open, or collect, etc) six same card then you are not limited by the rule 4 of same card; you can use 6. Otherwise you have to use only however many you have 06:28:49 zzo38: it can't be done in limited because it uses cards from more than one block 06:29:08 ais523: I have once played in a Limited game that involved two blocks. 06:29:24 oklopol: What if you make up the rule, that you are disqualified if the game doesn't end? 06:30:33 (Usually a Limited game is only one block, but occasionally it is two blocks, or possibly even three or more. Constructed games are usually always two blocks, but may be unlimited to the number of blocks, or some other rule.) 06:30:39 it's nondeterministic. but i guess you could require that there are no infinite plays or you lose. 06:30:46 what fun to check.... :D 06:31:00 Disqualified if you cannot prove that your move ends 06:31:35 :D 06:31:59 > 2*pi / 0.01720209895 06:32:00 365.2568983263281 06:32:14 Is the game TC? If so, the no infinite plays thing might be difficult 06:32:29 i wonder when wolfram's 1000 page book called "krhm actually it's MY 2,3 machine not alex's" comes out 06:32:41 oerjan: What are you calculating? 06:32:56 > "A " ++ fix ("new kind of " ++) 06:32:58 "A new kind of new kind of new kind of new kind of new kind of new kind of ... 06:33:13 zzo38: http://www.nature.com/news/the-astronomical-unit-gets-fixed-1.11416 had this number 06:33:14 my supervisor told me he was once invited to be invited speaker in one of wolfram's seminars 06:33:34 Is the astronomical unit broken? 06:33:49 it's something like the average number of radians earth traces out per day 06:33:59 Sgeo: can't be tc due to memory being limited to the number of pieces on board. 06:34:08 zzo38: well it was complicated to calculate 06:34:18 I love SMBC! 06:34:25 There was a paper that contrived a TC game with finite pieces 06:34:30 I thought astronomical units is the distance from here to the sun. 06:35:29 zzo38: yes, but earth's orbit is elliptical so you need to choose one of the distances 06:35:37 I think JPL ephemerides are not in astronomical units anyways so at least those ones are unaffected but are some ephemerides in astronomical units? 06:36:02 oerjan: Yes, I thought you have to choose the average? (Do you have to know what kind of average?) 06:37:40 zzo38: well it's like with the meter, it was originally defined as 1/10000000'th of the meridian from the pole to equator through paris - but that's awkward to measure all the time so they redefined it, although in that case they even calculated it wrong the first time 06:38:29 O yes I heard of that; they did it wrong the first time even by their definition. Better definitions anyways would be by something such as speed of light, I think it is now 06:38:37 yes it is 06:40:32 zzo38: oh there were other problems fixed by the recent fixing of au to meters 06:41:02 the old definition didn't mesh with relativity and depended on the changing mass of the sun 06:41:02 the global economy 06:41:36 Ephemerides need a unit of distance and of time. I think they use kilometres per day, although you could use lightseconds per second, or metres per second, or whatever (I happen to like using the speed of light as the ephemeris units, although this may cause problems in floating point precision I don't know for sure) 06:41:49 yeah the meter now is defined in terms of the oscillation period of a cesium atom 06:41:55 oerjan: O, so they fix that too now, is good 06:42:48 -!- drocta has quit (Quit: Page closed). 06:43:18 you could say it's also defined in terms of the speed of light, but the speed of light is an arbitrary unit conversion and not a fundamental physical constant 06:43:38 kmc: i'm not sure that it's the atom itself which oscillates, just one of its kinds of emitted radiation 06:43:41 a much better definition would be "the distance from the mass center of earth to the mass center of the sun, in the reference frame of the mass center of the definition user's right eye" 06:44:27 oklopol: sounds usable. 06:44:47 oerjan: you're right 06:46:19 Can you say it is defined in terms of the speed of light if you then define seconds in terms of the cesium atom? Therefore something must relate the distance and time, so you can have the units. 06:46:43 hmm 06:46:53 heegan 06:47:21 I don't like humanistic units; you must define them in terms of physics instead, is much better. 06:47:39 applying myself as a function to the topic... i almost forgot what i was about to say 06:47:41 That way you always know what they are even if you removed your right eye or whatever 06:47:44 What's a humanistic unit? 06:47:53 sure, i'm just saying that "speed of light" is like "number of inches in a meter" 06:48:57 i wonder if sci fi has been written wherein many aspects of the universe are constant, like a chessboard or a video game 06:48:58 kmc: No I don't think so! The speed of light is an actual speed, not a unitless number. Isn't it? 06:49:41 zzo38: in traditional unit systems it is so, but in studying relativity it is convenient to use a unitless 1 as the speed of light 06:49:47 and you can do that 06:49:59 kmc: Well, yes; I agree with that. That isn't what I meant, though. 06:50:01 zzo38: sorry, i meant to say "rightmost eye" 06:50:08 How can speed be unitless? 06:50:12 this fixes the issue you mentioned. 06:50:13 like in a video game, the size of a planet tends to remain constant indefinitely.. for as long as there are people to play the game 06:50:19 Sgeo: because distance and time are actually the same kind of thing 06:50:28 I meant that the speed of the light is the same speed no matter what number you use to represent it. 06:50:54 i imagine this is true of things like dwarf fortress, minecraft, terraria, chess, secondlife, etc 06:50:56 it's as if all along we had one unit for north-south distance, and a different unit for east-west distance, and then one day someone figured out that you can relate these 06:51:41 I do agree it is useful to use a unitless 1 since space and time just different dimensions (although the sign is opposite) 06:51:46 itidus21, Second Life's size isn't constant 06:51:54 Space keeps getting added to it 06:52:08 They need room for all the penises 06:52:10 Although I guess "amount of possible space" might be constant 06:52:12 Sgeo: i suppose that my statement doesn't stand. 06:52:29 .. i didnt quite get at the essence of the question 06:52:39 * Sgeo is unsure if they use ints or uints or something to specify regions 06:52:59 If they do, then yeah, Second Life has a finite size, but it's MUCH larger than currently accessible size 06:53:14 also you can create and lose blocks in minecraft and minesweeper 06:53:48 ok ok i know what i mean 06:53:58 you should always know what you mean 06:54:01 in minecraft, a block is a perfect unit 06:54:02