Great one-liners from PF members

[PeroK]

The accordian is the Rodney Dangerfield of musical instruments.

If you play the accordion, then musically you are on the road to nowhere:

 

[sysprog]

@PeroK, isn't the road to nowhere better than the highway to hell?



and yeah Steve Vai is a lot better at guitar than I am $\dots$

 

[gmax137]

Just out of curiosity, what is funny or witty or interesting about this one ?

As I recall, @Vanadium 50 had posted something about gentlemen not playing trombones, I just followed up with accordions in a similar vein.

BTW, when I lived in New Orleans I saw a guy in the Quarter playing Jimi Hendix's "Voodoo Chile" on an accordion. That's something you don't forget.

 

[Vanadium 50]

BTW, when I lived in New Orleans I saw a guy in the Quarter playing Jimi Hendix's "Voodoo Chile" on an accordion. That's something you don't forget

As much as you might want to.

 

[sysprog]

I thought of doing the Alan Parsons Project "I, Robot" song as an accordion piece $-$ bass on the left hand, chords on the right $-$ I wasn't good enough $\dots$

 

[sysprog]

If you want to learn QFT, you should be looking at textbooks, not Wikipedia. $-$ @PeterDonis

 

[strangerep]

[Boromir: "...one works through a textbook..."]

... but not the way Boromir would do it, i.e., slashing it into a zillion pieces with his trusty broadsword...

 

[Rive]

... but not the way Boromir would do it, i.e. ...

... and then dying halfway

 

[sysprog]

Proof by personal incredulity does not count. $-$ @jbriggs444

 

[Borg]

Proof by personal incredulity does not count. $-$ @jbriggs444

I think that could apply to a lot these days.

 

[Keith_McClary]

Proof by personal incredulity does not count. $-$ @jbriggs444

Poisson thought that he had found a flaw when he argued that a consequence of Fresnel's theory was that there would exist an on-axis bright spot in the shadow of a circular obstacle, where there should be complete darkness according to the particle theory of light. Since the Arago spot is not easily observed in everyday situations, Poisson interpreted it as an absurd result and that it should disprove Fresnel's theory.

 

[PeterDonis]

I think your interpretation would be better described as "shut up during calculation, but talk a lot when get bored by calculation".

 

[sysprog]

Thanks so much Mark44. It works My program compiles. $-$ @yungman (creds also to @Mark44)

 

[sysprog]

And $1^1 . 2^2 . 3^3 . 4^4 . 5^5$ is the number of seconds in 1,000 days. $-$ @fresh_42

 

[sysprog]

I do not see any wisdom in teaching physics without math. That's like study of literature without language. $-$ @anorlunda

 

[anorlunda]

I think many PF regulars have said this one in their own words. I found @phinds and @sophiecentaur said it, but there are many more. I'll paraphrase.

Thinking outside the box is admirable, but only after you learn what is inside the box.

I like it so much because it expresses PF's mission statement. We are here to help people learn what is inside the box.

 

[phinds]

I think many PF regulars have said this one in their own words. I found @phinds and @sophiecentaur said it, but there are many more.

fresh_42 beat you to it in post #2

 

[Astronuc]

I think many PF regulars have said this one in their own words. I found @phinds and @sophiecentaur said it, but there are many more. I'll paraphrase.

Thinking outside the box is admirable, but only after you learn what is inside the box.

I like it so much because it expresses PF's mission statement. We are here to help people learn what is inside the box.

Outside the box, one still needs to be on solid ground.

 

[fresh_42]

Outside the box, one still needs to be on solid ground.

Nice one!

 

[sysprog]

If you owe the bank $5000, you have a problem. If you owe the bank $5,000,000, the bank has a problem. $-$ Vanadium 50

 

[Demystifier]

Anyway the Noether theorem proves that there is no ether

 

[sysprog]

That Noether pun reminded me obliquely of a nun-punning but wry one-liner reply on a police forum to a kid who was asking about probable cause $-$ "probable cause = you probably did it".

 

[sysprog]

How can you determine if a fan is better at blowing or sucking?

If it's made in China, it probably sucks.

 

[sysprog]

A gladius in the guts doesn't bother me but stubbed pinkie toes are no laughing matter. $-$ @cybernetichero

 

[epenguin]

Orange Reindeer, someone had to do it.

 

[Astronuc]

stats is like a bikini, it's the bits you don't see you want to know about.

One statement in a paragraph. Nevertheless, one line I could relate to during high school and university.

 

[bhobba]

One statement in a paragraph. Nevertheless, one line I could relate to during high school and university.

And recently found to be so true with regard to Covid. I got 'conned'.

See: https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-c...the-primary-analysis-of-phase-iii-trials.html

Then read: https://healthcareworkersaustralia.com/2021/02/11/backing-up-our-gains/

The original article based, on a linked Lancet preprint, was in fact a post-hoc analysis looking for evidence that what the UK did - namely vaccinate once as many as possible and in 12 weeks do the second vaccination. That is experimental design bias. What is needed is a separately designed trial, which I believe is being done.

Thanks
Bill

 

[berkeman]

I just ran across this by @jim hardy from back in 2014 in a thread in the EE forum. It seems equally applicable in 2021...

In these helter-skelter times it is good to have reminders of from whence we came.
Like a good mariner who hones his skill at steering by a periodic look at his wake.

 

[sysprog]

It may take a really long time but through persistent effort you will succeed or decide to become a manager so you can boss other people into finding the bug. $-$ @jedishrfu

 

[bhobba]

It may take a really long time but through persistent effort you will succeed or decide to become a manager so you can boss other people into finding the bug. $-$ @jedishrfu

The trouble is 'human' skills, which you may or may not be perceived to have, come into making the move into management. I am, by some (not all - it varied), considered weak in those areas. I rose very quickly to team leader level where I could boss others into finding the bug, but took the view of if my staff were having trouble to go through it with them as a 'learning' moment, and did the really 'hard' stuff myself based on my judgement of what my staff was ready to tackle. Or simply it was so easy assigning it to a member of my team was not worth the management effort of the 'paperwork' involved or simply after speaking to a 'user' it needed to be done 'fast'. Those that wanted to rise even higher than team leader made sure they allocated 'finding the bug' to their staff and concentrated on management. Guess who never made it above team leader level, and who went further up the hierarchy? I was 'miffed' about it at the time, but now I just laugh about it as just how hierarchies work. I also know of some that were technically weak and took a long time to become a team leader. After that they rose through the heirachy very quickly, becoming very senior.

Thanks
Bill

 

[strangerep]

Guess who never made it above team leader level, and who went further up the hierarchy? I was 'miffed' about it at the time, but now I just laugh about it as just how hierarchies work. I also know of some that were technically weak and took a long time to become a team leader. After that they rose through the heirachy very quickly, becoming very senior.

The technically superior people should leave and become independent contractors. But company management will never tell their good people about this important little fact of life.

 

[bhobba]

The technically superior people should leave and become independent contractors. But company management will never tell their good people about this important little fact of life.

Correct. But there is a downside. If you work for the government like I did, you also lost a lot of benefits including very generous superannuation. Admittedly you had to pay for it - it worked out before tax about 1/3 of my wage because it was taken out of your after tax income. But I was able to retire early and am on a good income. Nowadays there is no government super (except for legacy employees) - but you must pay into a private super fund you nominate and, it is about 16%, but is taken out of your before tax income. That is the minimum - you can elect to pay more if you like. I know people who pay 30% or more. When I worked I paid 50% tax so it is about the same that actually went into super. Interestingly the government actuary figured out who was better off - those in the old super scheme, or the new one. Not only did you pay more because you had to pay tax on the contributions, but to add insult to injury, the actuary found you got more when you retired - the reason being when you retire your income from the superfund you chose is tax advantaged - I have to pay full tax. Rather annoying. But in typical government fashion they can't even get that right:
https://the-riotact.com/hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-at-stake-in-aps-super-battle/404889

I am a risk averse type as far as jobs go - I do not mind being paid less as long as I had a safe, secure job. Of course many people suggested contracting - but it was not my thing. Besides I lived a pretty 'austere' lifestyle not requiring much money anyway.

Thanks
Bill

 

[sysprog]

You mean this doesn't work on Windows?

You have obviously mistaken Windows for an OS that works.

 

[Ibix]

90 dimensions suffices

No comment.

 

[berkeman]

It has been called "word salad" but that is insulting to salad.