What is the newest installment of 'Random Thoughts' on Physics Forums?

In summary, the conversation consists of various discussions about documentaries, the acquisition of National Geographic by Fox, a funny manual translation, cutting sandwiches, a question about the proof of the infinitude of primes, and a realization about the similarity between PF and PDG symbols. The conversation also touches on multitasking and the uniqueness of the number two as a prime number.
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #5,707
The teens are over and now we're into perfect vision : 2020. Happy New Year to all. And the usual cheesy joke: "Talk to you next year" .
 
  • #5,708
WWGD said:
The teens are over and now we're into perfect vision : 2020. Happy New Year to all. And the usual cheesy joke: "Talk to you next year" .

"next decade" - FTFY
 
  • #5,709
Matterwave said:
"next decade" - FTFY
Good point. Edit: But we'll never had back the " See you next millenium " from 12/31/99.
 
  • #5,710
Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander
  • #5,711
fresh_42 said:
Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.

Eh, the delineation of a "decade" is somewhat arbitrary anyways. Since most people refer to the decade as 10-19 inclusive (the 2010's) then I think I'm good :D
 
  • #5,712
Matterwave said:
Eh, the delineation of a "decade" is somewhat arbitrary anyways. Since most people refer to the decade as 10-19 inclusive (the 2010's) then I think I'm good :D
Yes, but it's wrong. Ten is ***0.

The 80s are 1980 - 1989, the decade is 1981 - 1990.
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander
  • #5,713
fresh_42 said:
Yes, but it's wrong. Ten is ***0.

The 80s are 1980 - 1989, the decade is 1981 - 1990.

I'll just quote wikipedia:

"Any period of ten years is a decade, and there is no 'official' legal nor administrative start or end point,[1][2] so it can be any arbitrary span of ten years. "

"The frequently used method to refer to decades is the cardinal method, which groups years based on their shared tens digit, such as the nineteen-sixties (1960s) referring to the period from 1960 to 1969.[4][5]"

"The rarer ordinal decade counts years beginning with the year AD 1, as the Gregorian calendar counts ordinally rather than cardinally, and hence there was no year zero. For example, the term 196th decade spans the years from 1951 to 1960. "

So I choose the cardinal method rather than the ordinal method. This is the way. :)
 
  • #5,714
I choose the cardinal method this year and the ordinal next year. Two end-of-decade parties - what's not to like?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes fresh_42 and BillTre
  • #5,715
fresh_42 said:
Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.
I thought people were really confused back then: We're in 3BC and next year is 2BC? Who is C?
 
  • #5,716
fresh_42 said:
Next decade starts in a year, not today. Same as next millenium started on 12/31/00. There was no year 0.
So we went from -1 to 1? As long as I have my Pannetonne (Sp?) I am ok.
 
  • #5,717
WWGD said:
I thought people were really confused back then: We're in 3BC and next year is 2BC? Who is C?
We'll soon C?
 
  • Like
Likes WWGD
  • #5,718
Ibix said:
We'll soon C?
Not the one I'd like 2B. Not even in 4D *
 
  • #5,719
Re 4D:
I felt guilty and did not take my friends money on a bet that I can watch movies in 4D --
the apartment of another friend.
 
  • #5,720
WWGD said:
So we went from -1 to 1? As long as I have my Pannetonne (Sp?) I am ok.
Yes.
 
  • #5,721
fresh_42 said:
Yes.
Like a Complex log, a discontinuity at the origin.
 
  • #5,722
WWGD said:
Like a Complex log, a discontinuity at the origin.
Only proof that ##0## isn't a natural number! It was the first pure mathematical discovery.
 
  • #5,723
fresh_42 said:
Only proof that ##0## isn't a natural number! It was the first pure mathematical discovery.
"Pure"?
 
  • #5,724
Pure in the sense that some Indians a couple of thousand years ago suddenly decided to count something that isn't there!
 
  • #5,725
fresh_42 said:
Pure in the sense that some Indians a couple of thousand years ago suddenly decided to count something that isn't there!
But it seems you can say something similar about negative integers and ultimately the Reals.
 
  • #5,726
WWGD said:
But it seems you can say something similar about negative integers and ultimately the Reals.
Yes, but zero was first. The integers were probably discovered by an ancient bookie.
 
  • #5,727
fresh_42 said:
Yes, but zero was first. The integers were probably discovered by an ancient bookie.
I guess it is the type of stuff in what's his name's book, fluffernutter's Godel , Escher, Bach (Im on my phone, hard to search and come back). Ill get to it some day I hope. Edit: Make that Hofstatder ( a mouthful) instead of fluffernutter.
 
Last edited:
  • #5,728
Kind of weird phrase: Sidney and Cindy in Disney.
 
  • #5,729
Kind of strange that now they have the acronym STEAM : Science, Technology, Arts and Mathematics. Nothing against art, just not clear on how/if it belongs in the selection.
 
  • #5,730
WWGD said:
Kind of strange that now they have the acronym STEAM : Science, Technology, Arts and Mathematics. Nothing against art, just not clear on how/if it belongs in the selection.
Guess it's because you missed the E(scher).
 
  • #5,731
fresh_42 said:
Guess it's because you missed the E(scher).
STEEAM?
How fluffernutter of me.
Wonder if Escherichia Coli derives from someone named Escher.
Du hast a similar acronym to STEM/STEAM auf Deutschland?
 
  • #5,732
MINT. Mathematics, Informatics (=CS), Natural Science and Technic.

I think it's not as frequently used as STEM is. We, too, have this abbreviation syndrom, but not so extensively as Americans with their abundance of 3-Letter codes. I wonder, whether that was an IVT OF IBM or PRV OBS.
 
  • #5,733
fresh_42 said:
MINT. Mathematics, Informatics (=CS), Natural Science and Technic.

I think it's not as frequently used as STEM is. We, too, have this abbreviation syndrom, but not so extensively as Americans with their abundance of 3-Letter codes. I wonder, whether that was an IVT OF IBM or PRV OBS.
Report that to the SAA then!
Edit: SAA: Society Against Abbreviations.
 
  • #5,734
fresh_42 said:
MINT. Mathematics, Informatics (=CS), Natural Science and Technic.

I think it's not as frequently used as STEM is. We, too, have this abbreviation syndrom, but not so extensively as Americans with their abundance of 3-Letter codes. I wonder, whether that was an IVT OF IBM or PRV OBS.
The more time goes by, the more information out there, the larger the number of acronyms and these may start ( absurdly) being longer, 4-, maybe 5 letters long. Maybe you can use this: number of acronyms, their length, to measure comolexity of a society/culture; bet there weren't so many even 50 years ago.
 
  • #5,735
WWGD said:
Maybe you can use this: number of acronyms, their length, to measure comolexity of a society/culture; bet there weren't so many even 50 years ago.
Yes, that's definitely a paradoxon. One should think that the total number of 3 letter abbreviations is bounded from above, but it obviously isn't!
 
  • #5,736
At 12 o clock midnight countless pets fled. This fireworks business is redundant me thinks :sorry:
 
  • #5,737
nuuskur said:
At 12 o clock midnight countless pets fled. This fireworks business is redundant me thinks :sorry:
It is as redundant as any other faith.
 
  • #5,738
fresh_42 said:
It is as redundant as any other faith.
Faith? Is it a religious thing?
 
  • #5,739
nuuskur said:
At 12 o clock midnight countless pets fled. This fireworks business is redundant me thinks :sorry:
A similar mess a while back when River Dance played with all the hard and loud shoe-tapping, there was a massive stampede of rats. Imagine you're a rat, doing whatever it is they do and for a few hours, without notice, you hear a loud, massive tapping noise. I bet they believed the end was near and fled in masse like crazy. A sort of modern version of the Pied Piper.
 
  • #5,740
Depends on the definition. The loud noise is assumed to scare off all evil demons.
 

Similar threads

34
Replies
1K
Views
30K
Replies
3K
Views
144K
Replies
2K
Views
157K
Replies
4K
Views
213K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top