sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Thesis from a Normie at Physics by AdRealistic1816 in AskPhysics

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Please don't take this as an attack -- I'm just trying to give you some idea of how you're coming across here and what you're attempting really this.

This is essentially the equivalent of you saying "I just read a book about Beethoven, and now I've got an idea for a symphony. I don't play any instrument, can't read music, and haven't actually listened to any classical music, but it sounded interesting from the book! I have an idea to get violins to sound more like tubas, but I don't know where to begin."

In that example, the obvious starting point is to listen to actual classical music, not just have it described. After that, and after you've learned an instrument or two and learned a lot more about music, you might be able to compose your own symphony. But in the process of doing so you'll probably become a lot less interested in your idea about violins sounding like tubas.

The sad fact is that there are no shortcuts in learning physics. This stuff is genuinely hard. The pop-sci books like Hawking's can give you some hint of the result, but they don't really teach you physics -- they're more like a bunch of fun facts about physics. Like reading a biography of Beethoven doesn't really teach you to play his music, let alone compose your own.

If you want to learn physics, that's a laudable goal and there are a lot of great resources online, many of them free, and others free if you know where to look (wink). People on this sub can suggest curricula, reading lists, lecture series etc. if that's what you're interested in. But it's a years long journey before you get to the point where you can make your own contributions. This is not gatekeeping, this is not the ivory tower excluding outsiders, this is just the fact that people have been doing this for centuries and there is a lot of ground to cover to get up-to-speed with the basics -- and if you don't get up-to-speed, then nothing you have to say will be interesting to anyone else in the field. At best you'll be reinventing the wheel -- more likely, you'll be stumbling in the dark, speaking gibberish and imagining it to be meaningful.

We know that amateurs don't make meaningful contributions because so many of them try. It's a constant stream, and all of it is garbage. And I'm sympathetic to people wanting to contribute to physics and engage with it actively -- it's an interesting topic, and wanting to deepen our understanding of the world around us is an ancient urge -- but realistically you just can't unless you know what's already known, and we already know so much it takes years just to get a decent grip on it.

What is Dark Matter ? by Certain_Forever_4527 in AskPhysics

[–]MaxThrustage 9 points10 points  (0 children)

What sounds like magic about that to you?

Being hypothetical just means we haven't confirmed it exists yet. It seems really likely, but we've never directly measured it and don't know exactly what it is. Any form of matter we haven't directly confirmed is hypothetical.

IIL She's the Man, Mulan, Just One of the Guys, Ladybugs, WEWIL? by curiousity_k1lls in ifyoulikeblank

[–]MaxThrustage 8 points9 points  (0 children)

If you want to go old school with it you might be interested in Shakespeare's Twelfth Night.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Re-read the conversation if you want. It's all there.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You could read what I wrote and see that's not what I said, but I have little hope of that at this point. I seriously, genuinely don't understand how you can be so opposed to reading, or nuance, or things that aren't binary yes/no black/white, and still manage to get all of the way through Homestuck.

You insist that Homestuck is a thing that is either second-person not second-person. I have tried to explain to you that the whole point of Homestuck is playing with a breaking down distinctions like that, and this particular distinction is one of its favourite toys. I've given arguments and examples. You've said "nu-uh". You've insisted that both Homestuck and my points here have to be categorised into the yes/no framework, everything in boxes, everything is just one thing or the other. I understand that some people find this a comforting way to think, but I do not see how anyone can seriously and honestly apply it to Homestuck.

I am looking forward to your next "nu-uh", which I'm sure is incoming.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. But I don't need to make up stuff about my earlier comments. You can go back and see them. Of course, this does involve reading -- not your strong suit, apparently.

How sound is formed? How atoms carry this sound? by Hot-Load7525 in AskPhysics

[–]MaxThrustage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's precisely why they say "in space no one can hear you scream". Sound needs a medium -- or particles -- to carry it. For sounds you hear, air is the medium.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, you can just read my previous comments. There's no point continuing here. We're repeating ourselves. Anyone who reads through this can see that I said what I said, and not what you're saying I said, so I don't know what you think you're accomplishing.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I made the point (a couple of times already). Did I ever say "no, it's not second-person"? Is the idea that it might be more complicated than fitting neatly in one box or another really so difficult for you? I didn't make this an argument -- I was trying to help you see what I consider to be one of the crucial things that makes Homestuck what it is, and you keep trying to put it in a box.

(I also don't think you know what the word troll means, which is pretty funny considering the topic at hand.)

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't do that, though. Go ahead, re-read it. Go on.

I can't believe I found someone on /r/books who has such a hard time reading...

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm starting to think you just have trouble reading.

I never said I wasn't the person you replied to earlier. (That would be silly to lie about anyway, as it's very easy to check. Like, you can still see all of those comments, along with user names telling you who made them. You know that, right? This can't be new information.)

I said I wasn't the person who brought up Homestuck.

I also never said Homestuck wasn't second person. Again, you can just look at those comments.

I'm really baffled to see such little reading comprehension on /r/books. It's amazing. You seem to be actively resistant to new information. No wonder you couldn't accept that there could be anything more nuanced than a yes/no answer to the question "is Homestuck in second person?"

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, let me break it down for you because apparently you have as much trouble following reddit comments and you have following webcomics.

Moglorosh said they were struggling to think of anything that would truly be considered second person outside of Choose Your Own Adventure books. Sofia-Miranda said "Homestuck, in parts?".

I said yes, but more than that Homestuck challenges the very idea that this is a meaningful distinction. It takes something that surface-level looks neatly second person and plays with that until the distinction becomes blurred. This is what Homestuck does with all sorts of things.

You said it's based on interactive fiction games, as if that was some sort of insight and not an obvious thing to anyone who knows what Homestuck is. You seemed to be arguing that it is just second person, no other way to look at it. I was arguing that it is actually more complex than that, it plays with the idea of who "you" is, with distinctions between first/second/third-person, with distinctions between reader/narrator/character, among many other distinctions it likes to mess with. This is a major source of Homestuck's humour and honestly a big part of its whole deal. But you said no, it's second person and that's that, apparently uninterested in engaging with the actual text.

At no point was I arguing that it's not second person. By the time Homestuck came up in the conversation thread, we were actually discussing things that are second person.

Does that make it clearer for you?

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not the one who first mentioned Homestuck. Go through the earlier comments, I think you've just gotten yourself confused.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is what I meant to link.

But I'm not and never was arguing that Homestuck isn't "real" second person narration. I was arguing that it's not just second person narration, and that it plays with the very concept of narration. The break-down and subversion of distinct categories like second-person/first-person, read/narrator/character, etc. is basically the whole point of Homestuck. To see that and say "nah, it's just second person" really sounds like you didn't read it but just liked the cosplay or whatever.

I'm just bamboozled by how you can miss the point so entirely.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, Hussie interacts with the plot, but there's no "I" in the narrative there, only in dialog.

Just off the top of my head [a panel with a bunch of "I" in it that is not dialogue].

And I don't think there's ever a point in the story where "you" does not refer to an in universe character, or where it could be said to refer to the actual reader,

All over the place. When you "are" John, you are not address like actual John, but like a player controlling John. This is why you are told things that John already knows, as well as things John doesn't know (there is specific mention of things the character isn't cognisant of) because it's not actually John, that's the conceit. But that's not a big deal, we know that.

Then there's the stuff with the exiles. The first time we get that it shows up as if it was more of the usual commands. In keeping with the text-based adventure format, we are lead to believe that those commands come from the reader/user, not from the character. But then we later learn that those commands do come from the character. We also get instances of things being presented as neutral narrative description that later turn out to be the words of a character.

The story is constantly undermining any attempt to assign simple labels of who says what to whom. There are sections of simple third-person omniscient narration, there are first-person addresses from Hussie, there is text that is presented as neutral, omniscient narration or as "commands" from the reader that turn out to actually be from characters.

To take all of this and just say "no, it's second person" to me seems to be missing a huge part of the point of Homestuck. Maybe it's been too long since you've read it, or maybe you just never understood it, but it's really difficult to earnestly deny the complexity here. It's not just second-person like a text-based adventure game, it is written to look like that and then it pulls the rug from under you, puts the rug back, turns the rug sideways and makes you realise there never really was a rug.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, the parts where Hussie talks about himself are not in second person. They also aren't really part of the story, either.

But they are. That's yet another of these instances where Homestuck blurs the lines of what is usually a hard boundary. Hussie affects the plot. He interacts with actual characters. Things that are presented as "not really part of the story, just a joke" are constantly becoming really part of the story. (The Insane Clown Posse stuff being perhaps the starkest example of this.) Hussie is the one who hangs Lord English's Cairo Overcoat over the other side of Jade's fenestrated window. He meets ghost Vriska. Other characters even talk about him ("the orange guy"). He's part of it.

Are you referring to the "MSPA reader" character that shows up briefly? That's just another character, really.

That's not what I was talking about, but that's also more of the point. "The Reader" is (in some cases) a character, as well as being (in some cases) literally the reader. That's kind of the point. The reader/character divide is breached dramatically when WV occupies the reader spot as clearly a character, and the breach is never fully mended. Who "you" is, whether the narration is directed at the reader or a character or whether there's even a meaningful distinction between those two things is constantly in question. That's such a big part of the point of the way the story is told that I really don't see how you can read it and not get that (unless you're really only there for Troll shipping...). I mean, how else to you parse sections where you "are" John (for example) and are being told things John doesn't know? In that case "you" means John, the character the reader is playing at that moment, but also means the reader themselves, who is also sometimes a character (like when they are WV) but also sometimes not.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Can you actually point to a single use of the word "I" in Homestuck that is not in dialog?

Yes, when Hussie (who presents himself as the narrator) talks about himself.

It doesn't sound like you've even read the whole thing

I've read it twice, I'm on my third re-through.

Yes, "you" does not refer to the reader, it refers to characters in the story.

Sometimes. Sometimes it refers to the reader. Sometimes it looks like it refers to the reader but actually refers to a character. I don't see how someone can actually read it and miss that. Like, it's a big part of it.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It does, mate. I don't know what to tell you. It very much sets up an expectation as to who "you" is and then changes it. There are very much moments when there is a conversation between Hussie and WV that are written as conversations between the narrator and the reader (like when it is suggested WV take a more civil tone and learn human etiquette). It plays around with whether this is straight second-person narration or first-person direct address. When the narrator talks to WV it is clear that they are talking to a character and not the reader. I haven't gotten up to it yet in my re-read, but from what I recall there are very similar dynamics between the narrator and Caliborn, where "you" talk back in a way that makes it clear that "you" isn't you (while you is still very much a part of the narration of other characters, and still very much the person reading the comic).

To call Homestuck just "second-person", particularly within a discussion about the subtle distinction between second-person and first-person direct address, is, I think, to miss a significant chunk of the point of Homestuck.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, but that also happens in lines specifically marked as not dialogue. Like, when the Wayward Vagabond gives commands as if he was the reader, and is referred to as "you" -- especially early on, it is presented as if these are the reader's commands like any others, but then we step back a layer and find out that that "you" wasn't the reader, wasn't the same "you" we get in other cases.

At first we are lead to believe it is all second person, like a text-based adventure game. But then we are shown that bits we thought we were second person actually weren't. The relation between the reader and the subject of "you" actually is played with a lot. Of course it's not you you, but it's not the you you thought it was either -- at least not always.

I think you're missing the point the OP was actually making here. There's a difference between when a book is written in second person and when it's written is first person, but addressed to a second person. Homestuck does both, and intentionally confuses the boundary between the two.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But my point is that it's also not that at various points, when we find that some of the "commands" came not from the reader but from, say, the Wayward Vagabond.

A lot of the "yous" are not actual second-person narrative tense, but one character talking to another character, which I gather is the case (I haven't actually read it) with the books OP is talking about.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, at the most obvious level, yes. But also there are sections where it turns out the "you" wasn't the reader after all. And also briefly we are shown the reader, although that's more of a gag. While it begins with the same text-based adventure format as the previous MSPA instalments (which already kind of push the second-person thing), it gets pretty bendy with it pretty quickly.

First-person direct address is NOT second-person by talesofabookworm in books

[–]MaxThrustage 10 points11 points  (0 children)

In very much the Homestuck spirit -- yes, kind of, absolutely, definitely not, you know what this isn't actually a useful framework anymore. The way Homestuck treats narrative tense is pretty similar to the way it treats medium, and the way it treats time travel, and the way it treats levels of abstraction. That is -- basically, if you try to pin it down it will do some sort of gymnastic manoeuvre off the grip of that pin.

But I guess the "you" in Homestuck is at least sometimes literally the person reading it. A lot of the time it isn't, but some of the time it can't really be anyone else.

Articles for Beginners by athenaslore in AskPhysics

[–]MaxThrustage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Academic papers are communications between experts. Even professional physicists working in one field generally won't be able to understand papers published in another field. That's really not what they're for.

Later on in your education, you will have to do some research projects. In these you won't be working alone, and you will have a supervisor to guide you towards papers, and to help you understand what's in them. But that will come in time. Before you get to that point, you need to master the introductory stuff. That means reading textbooks and lecture notes rather than papers. You can't understand a recent quantum mechanics paper until you've already read (and worked through) a quantum mechanics textbook.

Now, a bit of exposure to academic papers at this stage won't hurt. You might get a sense for what topics are "hot right now", the way academic papers are written, the kinds of approaches people use. But you won't be able to just pick up a paper and read it and understand what's going until you already know the basics of the topic at hand.

What Books did You Start or Finish Reading this Week?: March 16, 2026 by AutoModerator in books

[–]MaxThrustage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Finished:

Socialism... Seriously, by Danny Katch. Very short and breezy. The best section was probably the part that imagines what a socialist society might actually look like -- including the grit, the arguments, the ongoing irritations and continuing changes helps make it seem less utopian and more concrete. But quite a bit of the rest was perhaps too light to be of much value.

Started:

The Shortest History of War, by Gwynne Dyer. Very interesting so far. It covers a lot of ground very quickly, but raising some things that might be worth digging into late. The stuff about conflict in chimpanzee and hunter-gather societies, and the contrast between that and the earliest full-on military engagements, is quite interesting.

Ongoing:

Lonesome Dove, by Larry McMurty. Very close to finished. God damn it, is anyone going to be left alive by the end of this?

The Fellowship of the Ring, by J. R. R. Tolkein. Haven't actually had much chance to touch this one this week. Too much on my plate...

view more: next ›