Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 05:57:50 JST iced depresso
   maxwell: :ablobcatbongokeyboard: gon write my equations in quaternions
   :neofox_gun: that shit is for the birds rewrite it in vector calculus
   :bunhd: what if we rewrote it in geometric algebra
   :neofox_googly_shocked: no thats fucking the wrong way
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 06:03:48 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype i don't think geometric algebra existed in maxwell's time.
     
     one of the weird things i learned from the crazy people is that the original electromagnet equations are using 4D quaternions or some shit, and he was forced to rewrite the whole thing in vector calculus.
     
     i think some other person downstream from him then amputated some of the dimensionality further, but i don't understand enough god tier math to investigate any of it.
     
     i just know geometric algebra is fascinating and i had to write some support code for it once
   • Embed this notice
     subtype (subtype@insufferable.tools)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 06:03:50 JST subtype

     in reply to
     @icedquinn quaternions for electromagnetics / 3d graphics are just geometric algebra done in an obtuse way that obscures what you're actually doing tbh
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:35:24 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype i don't remember most of the stuff i read about GA. i remember some basic concepts like being able to derive all the transforms from wedge operators and reflections
     
     i know from 3d math that rotational transforms are improperly represented by euler vectors and you need that fourth dimension or else spinny shit doesn't work.
     
     as for maxwell you have to find the original print of his book. don remember where those are rn
   • Embed this notice
     subtype (subtype@insufferable.tools)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:35:27 JST subtype

     in reply to

     @icedquinn Yeah, he probably couldn’t do it back then that way. And I might have been talking out of my ass as per Maxwell in general; I wasn’t taught his equations in the quaternion form and can’t even find that formulation right now to check.

     I see quaternions pop up a lot in 3D graphics though, and you get the same math but with a cleaner explanation with GA: https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions
     In particular, the weird 4D thing disappears (though quaternions used for 3D rotations aren’t really 3D, as only unit quaternions are used and thus one coordinate is redundant).

     Though the real fun with GA starts when you stop aping the standard 3D transformation formulas and leave humanity behind with something like representing 3D points as vectors in a 5D space with (++++-) signature (so squared magnitue of a vector is something like x^2 + y^2 + z^2 + w^2 - u^2).

     (also sorry for the late response, I was distracted by the thread that went from sideloading apps on iOS to the history of feudalism)

   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:39:48 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype its mostly a curiosity for me more than anything. there was an odd chain of claims that amounts to
     
     standard engineering goes like this
     
     faraday does a magnets
     maxwell finalizes the math
     ??? scientists reject it and make him rewrite it as vectors
     something about the vectors is different
     ??? forgar the name takes the vectors and amputates half of the formulas because reasons
     heaviside and poynting et all finish electrical engineering using the amputated vectors
     relativity et all uses this model
     
     supposedly tesla liked to fuck around and was using the quaternion form, which eric dollard makes some reference to.
     
     at one point i came across an amusing argument that was saying technically some solutions to maxwells equations account for unlimited vacuum energy entering the system :blobcatgoogly: but those solutions are shelved because it makes thermodynamics unhappy
     
     i suspect newton and tesla were probably more correct than einstein, but i'm also a weirdo who likes weird shit. and i just want to make basic circuits :blobcatlaydown:
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:41:51 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype electronics acting like a fluid is another weird thing that comes up in the weird papers. one of the actually verified weird physics (townsen-brown effect) works that way. you pump up voltage through the tubes and shoot it through an asymmetric capacitor and it makes shit fly around. deeply inefficient mode of propulsion but it shouldn't exist to begin with.
     
     also did some tests with doing things real stupid (running a circuit off the negative poles of batteries only and having the whole thing on a negative gradient, like biology does it.)
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:44:36 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype i think gravity is just dielecrtics trying to capture things to store their energy in. :neocat_thonk:
   • Embed this notice
     subtype (subtype@insufferable.tools)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:44:38 JST subtype

     in reply to
     @icedquinn
     >i suspect newton and tesla were probably more correct than einstein
     
     Eh, I doubt it, given that there is actual evidence of light bending due to gravity. If relativity is to be replaced, the new theory would have to account for that, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor%E2%80%93vector%E2%80%93scalar_gravity or something.
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 07:52:59 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype there was an old paper out of japan where they found anomalous mass in a spinning motor (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989PhRvL..63.2701H/abstract). it spins one way and it weighs less than it spins the other way. light has been found to do the same thing (sagnac effect.)
     
     i had found a student replicated Hayasaka a couple of years ago. it became one of those things like Fleishman-Ponz where people have seen it and then shrug it off like well that's fucking weird guess it doesn't mean anything though :youmusip:
     
     there is a very very heavy focus on how important counterspin is in all the weird flyer papers. i find it somewhat odd how often that specifically comes up.
     
     assuming that things are being pulled because thats what electrostatic fields do to contain energy, and since energy cares more about gradients than anything, then creating a counteracting barrier *would* free you from that. (we have this issue in motors where we get back emf because the magnets being pulled by one pole are trying to charge other poles which results in wasting a lot of energy as the opposing forces are trying to neutralize the others)
   • Embed this notice
     iced depresso (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 08:08:22 JST iced depresso

     in reply to

     • subtype
     @subtype it depends on which way you spin it. the direction of linear motion doesn't matter (michaelson-morley) but the angular motion does. photons spinning one orientation are slower than the other or none.
   • Embed this notice
     subtype (subtype@insufferable.tools)'s status on Saturday, 27-Jan-2024 08:08:24 JST subtype

     in reply to
     @icedquinn dunno about the rest, but Sagnac effect is something I've studied and it has nothing to do with mass, it's just that light sort of can't catch up if a fiber is spun with light inside it.