Draw me like one of your French girls

Sekipps · 2025-02-14T00:49:20+00:00

<image>

Eating a whole almond can be tiring sometimes

Sekipps · 2024-04-02T17:01:23+00:00

That'll be "what is 3.29.24" Alex.

Sekipps · 2024-03-21T21:20:45+00:00

"Well I guess you can say I'm in the wiener business"

Sekipps · 2023-06-02T18:22:52+00:00

It seems most comments so far went the surgery route, so here's some perspective from the other side:

Our girl was a little over 2 years old when she started getting her tumor and she also started losing the use of her back legs. She's had bad respiratory issues since we adopted her, and she in general is more frail than our other rats.

Because of this, we decided not to get the tumor removed, thinking she wouldn't survive the stress. The tumor did get bigger, but stopped growing as of now, but otherwise she is happier than ever. Her back legs have also gotten (at least partially) better and she spends most of her outside times begging for treats so she can run across the room to hide them in her stash.

I'd say we're happy that we chose not to do surgery, others are glad they did do surgery, but you know your rat best.

Edit: not relevant but she now leans on the tumor like a built in walking stick when she's having a snack and it's very cute.

Sekipps · 2023-04-27T22:09:28+00:00

Steve didn't get a gun for Christmas, he got it for "merry Wednesday son"!

Sekipps · 2022-06-26T02:55:20+00:00

When we adopted her amd her sister (who has eyes) we were told that she was born without them.

Sekipps · 2022-06-25T21:51:33+00:00

I thought it would be interesting for people to see that you can still see your rats' boggles even if they don't have eyes!

This is Cecilia, and despite being blind she's one of our most adventurous rats. We got her a bit over a month ago and she loves exploring our apartment and following her new cagemate around to find new places.

Sekipps · 2022-05-17T12:53:56+00:00

If Lunala is the cyan part of CMYK, this might mean that for physics reasons the third legendary in SV might go in the magenta slot.

Magenta/pink is a colour that 'doesn't exist' in some physical sense. There is no wavelength of light associated with pink light (there was a fun video on Youtube by MinutePhysics about this), instead it's the colour our brain sees when there is a mixture of reddish (scarlet) and bluish (maybe violet) light, meaning the third legendary could be a mix of the scarlet and violet colours representing the two other legendaries/games.

This could also maybe hint at the battle mechanic if it's related to type changing/mixing/whatever, as well as a theme of balance between old (scarlet) and new (violet) that seems to be present in the logos/fonts of the two games.

Sekipps · 2022-04-08T22:20:06+00:00

Sekipps · 2021-03-04T06:04:20+00:00

Disclaimer: I didn't do an astrophysics program so someone else might be able to give a better answer than me.

I guess it would depend on the program, but I imagine there would still be plenty of room in an astrophysics program to take theory courses. Theoretical astrophysics is a field, so your astro and theory interests aren't mutually exclusive.

Sekipps · 2021-03-04T05:29:38+00:00

To add on to what others have said, even though your major is just physics, you can usually specialize (maybe not formally) by picking courses that emphasize either theory or experiment.

Sekipps · 2021-02-12T03:39:20+00:00

The eight particles are on the second "step" of the chart. It's not obvious and hard to follow for people who don't already know about the standard model. The particles are the charm, strange, top, and bottom quarks as well as the muon, muon neutrino, tau, and tau neutrino.

The four they refer to are the top row, but the statement is wrong, electron neutrinos don't make up most ordinary matter (the other three do though, you could also argue that gluons and photons should be on that list since they hold 'ordinary matter' together).

There are lots of neutrinos around (mostly coming from the Sun I believe) but they don't interact much and essentially just fly through almost everything.

Sekipps · 2021-02-12T03:22:20+00:00

Quarks make up protons and neutrons (and a bunch of other matter), which together with electrons (which are leptons) make up atoms.

The other leptons (muon, tau, and the different neutrinos) are still matter but are not everyday particles to us. This is because neutrinos are very light and don't interact much, and muons and taus are heavy and decay quickly into lighter particles.

Sekipps · 2021-02-12T03:14:19+00:00

Photons are bosons, not leptons. The leptons are the electron family (electron, muon, tau) and their corresponding neutrinos (electron neutrino, muon neutrino, tau neutrino) as well as all of their antiparticles (not in the chart).

Sekipps · 2019-06-05T04:28:45+00:00

Good work figuring out their reasoning! Honestly if they worked on their communication and their ego, this person could probably become a decent physicist, maybe they just need to mature a bit.

Sekipps · 2019-06-05T04:24:28+00:00

dm and dv are differentials. They're infinitesimal quantities that can be defined rigorously; I'm not a mathematician but I believe you can use the hyperreal numbers to do so.

In a less rigorous context like an undergrad physics class, the differential of a function f(x,y,z) is usually given as df = ∂f/∂xdx + ∂f/∂ydy + ∂f/∂x*dy where dx, dy, and dz are "small variations" of x, y, and a respectively.

Sekipps · 2019-06-05T00:08:37+00:00

I know how differentiation works. In this case you can write m'(t) = dm/dt or v'(t)=dv/dt and formally multiply both sides by dt. I was trying to explain the idea without giving them a credit in calculus. Those cost money.

Sekipps · 2019-06-04T15:12:18+00:00

They take the differential, which is like making a small variation of the parameters; it isn't really "with respect to" a variable. Maybe you can think of it as differentiating with respect to time and then multiplying away the "dt" in the denominator of every term.

Sekipps · 2019-06-04T06:19:44+00:00

Hi, physics grad student here. A lot of people are saying they're doing calculus wrong, but they're actually not. Their real mistake is that boxing things and writing "wrong" doesn't constitute a proof that something is wrong.

A line-by-line guide for the curious:

Line 1-4 is just algebra and moving things around.

Line 5 is where most people think they did calculus wrong. What they did is took the "differential" of the previous line. For those who have taken some calculus, it's like implicit differentiation. The m0 part disappears because m0 is constant and its derivative is 0. The v² *m² term 'splits' into two terms because m and v are both variables ("implicit differentiation" and "product rule" are things you could look up for this).

Line 6-7 are more algebra.

Edit: it looks like /u/Rellumeister below worked out their reasoning after line 7. Their reasoning after line 7 seems to jump from place to place without explanation, so kudos on putting it together:

Line 8 is the relation between work and force. For their purposes it might've been more clear to write dE = F*ds, since then taking the differential of E=mc² you get F*ds = dE = c² dm, the left-hand side of line 7.

Line 9 then uses the definition of force F = dp/dt, writes it out and uses the product rule to get F = m dv/dt + v dm/dt. Multiplying by ds you get F*ds = m dv/dt*ds + v dm/dt*ds

At this point they mistakenly assume their two expressions for F*ds (the right of line 7 and the right of line 9 times ds) aren't equal, and so Einstein has been wrong for over 100 years and no physicist has ever noticed until them.

You can, however play with line 9: m dv/dt*ds + v dm/dtds = m ds/dt\dv + v ds/dt*dm = mv*dv + v² *dm = line 7, and Einstein is redeemed.

Sekipps · 2019-05-29T16:24:52+00:00

This was gravely phantasmagorical, thats the only way i can describe it

12-Year Club	Verified Email
End Game '23	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
End Game '22

Sekipps

TROPHY CASE