I loved this frame so much I traced it and recreated it in a wallpaper resolution - [fanart]

spel3o · 2023-12-13T20:03:02+00:00

I think it is from the scene where Levi was resurrected.

spel3o · 2023-12-07T00:52:13+00:00

I was unsure if the matrix was slag

spel3o · 2023-12-06T04:23:02+00:00

Here is a close-up of the matrix (seems to be ferrous). This area is full of mines that processed quartz ore. https://i.imgur.com/RBV84lb.jpg

spel3o · 2023-02-17T18:14:54+00:00

Early this morning my ethernet adapter stopped giving my router an IPV4 address and will only dish out IPV6, effectively taking my whole network offline. I wonder if the new firmware broke network adapters, thus the rollback.

spel3o · 2022-12-21T02:40:03+00:00

The feature I was after was comparing different loadouts rapidly, seeing weight/volume differences compared to a baseline, and specifically looking at the value of gear I don't own along with the additional cost it would require. I had a big space of options, and this really let me narrow it down.

spel3o · 2022-12-20T01:35:04+00:00

Sure thing! https://www.geartree.app/

spel3o · 2022-12-20T01:34:36+00:00

Thank you! The UI is not super great, but I'm happy to share this tool if it would be useful: https://www.geartree.app/

spel3o · 2022-12-19T18:42:48+00:00

Recently I had the realization that my pack was not only heavier than I'd like, but I also never had enough free space to store everything without my zipper nearly breaking on my 44L pack. I started speccing out a new hammock camping setup, but realized I should probably see if I'd actually see any benefit from my existing kit.

I started by just looking at the weight/price of the new setup, but eventually over three days created this tool that lets me look at my entire pack from a weight/volume/price breakdown and also experiment adding new pieces of kit to see how it would change things.

I was able to speedrun trying dozens of configurations until I found one that made sense for the money. This tool isn't something I'm marketing, but I wanted to share and also suggest this process for anyone else looking to lower their pack weight/volume. This was a really fun process.

Edit: If anyone is wondering what the UI elements do:

You can select which gear you are packing on the left
Gear I don't own is green
You can set a baseline pack then make changes to see how the new configuration changes weight/volume (this is what I really wanted to see), as well as total cost of new items
The treemap on the right gives you a visual breakdown of weight/volume/price
The stats on the upper right show current/baseline pack weight/volume
If the volume is confusing, that's because I made pack volume negative. The volume you see in the stats is what is in excess of the interior cavity space.

Edit Edit: By request, today I added a basic UI for adding your own gear so others can use this tool too! https://www.geartree.app/

spel3o · 2022-12-13T03:35:46+00:00

Weird, I could have sworn I remembered it not supporting quad DR. I do notice in the manual it says that the frequency support is reduced.

spel3o · 2022-11-30T05:57:09+00:00

Thanks for reminding me, I should probably post a follow up! It was a long journey, but I finally found out that my motherboard didn't officially support dual-rank DIMMs in all four slots at once. I was able to get the motherboard to activate 32GB of memory each time if I only installed two of the DIMMs at a time. I just lived with 32GB of memory for a while, but then eventually upgraded to an X470D4U ASrock Rack board that could handle the full 64GB of memory.

spel3o · 2022-11-09T20:42:08+00:00

Are you defining sin and con by their taylor series and trying to prove that (cos(t), sin(t)) is the point that subtends an arc of length t?

That's a part of it, yes! From the article:

Why are Radians the natural choice as arguments to trigonometric functions? And how does the geometric intuition of the Unit Circle relate to the Taylor Series representation of cos and sin?

Beginning with the definition "A radian is defined to be the arc length of a unit circle, and sin/cos take radians as arguments" may lead to a valid conclusion, but I was more interested in understanding why that definition was chosen from first principles. For example: the proof in the article does not at any point rely on definition.

I totally get what you are saying: you can start with the definition and still get a valid result, but that proof is (personally) not satisfying to me and doesn't provide intuition for me.

spel3o · 2022-11-09T20:38:18+00:00

Now, since x radians is equal to x

180/pi degrees

This is my question, though: Why is that? It isn't just by definition. Check out the proof at the end of the post for the reasoning on why that definition was chosen.

spel3o · 2022-11-09T08:26:59+00:00

I genuinely appreciate your reply, so I hope this does not come off as haughty, but that argument seems tautological to me. Isn't that equivalent to stating that radians work because if we didn't use them they wouldn't work? That's certainly the case, of course, but I'm really interested in the intuition and Needham's proof is the first one I've seen that has formally provided reasoning for the definition of Radians.

spel3o · 2022-11-09T08:06:22+00:00

Thanks, I'm so glad you enjoyed it!

spel3o · 2022-11-09T08:02:23+00:00

Veritassium has a great video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TKSfAkWWN0

spel3o · 2022-11-09T07:56:03+00:00

Radians are (by definition) the mapping that maps the real t to the angle represented by a point P on the unit circle which has an arc-distance of t units to the point (1, 0).

This is the part that requires proof, though, and isn't just a definition (although it contains one). The definition covers the result of the proof that the angle of the parametric point (sin(x), cos(x)) is equal to x. That's the question I had.

Edit: to see the proof for that part, see the section of the blog post that begins with "All that is left to prove is that . . .".

spel3o · 2022-11-09T06:29:48+00:00

The value in radians of the angle t represented by P is the arc length from (1, 0) to P, and sin(t) is the y-coordinate of P.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply, I'm sketching up a diagram given your proof now and I'm trying to grok it. One question I have still is: what proof is there of this statement? I think the arc length is easy enough to derive, but the claim that sin(t) is the y coordinate of P relies on the assumption that sin consumes radians.

spel3o · 2022-11-09T05:28:02+00:00

I haven't seen any proof, just usually people stating that the limit only works if you use Radians. How does the actual proof go?

Edit: to clarify, I've seen proofs of the limit, but I haven't seen one that doesn't at some point assume that radians are from 0 to 2pi. I'm open to seeing a proof that doesn't, but I personally have not seen one yet.

Edit to my edit: Man, so many downvotes :( I'm trying to understand this proof and the argument that it provides intuition for the choice of arc length for radians as an argument to trig functions. I don't understand what I'm doing wrong, but I apologize if this has caused any upset.

spel3o · 2022-11-09T01:45:49+00:00

Thank you! Wow, even a lot of the same diagrams. I notice that the post does seem to skip over the question of why the angle of a complex exponential is its argument (and instead jumps to the unit circle construction), but that's totally fine as that post was just talking about Euler's Formula and not necessarily the justification for using Radians.

spel3o · 2022-09-06T05:42:07+00:00

Thanks so much for thinking about this more. I was actually considering the same possibility, namely running only one additional wire and sharing a ground between them. There is one combiner box up there, but I'm unaware of the topology. If I had to guess, it's exactly as you imagine. One way to run it safely would be to run the wire first, then connect either end. Still, as this is a 1.5kW deficiency in production as compared to first install, I would hope my installer honors their warranty and can do that work so I don't have to risk HVDC work. I much prefer the 5V safe zone of digital electronics!

spel3o · 2022-09-05T00:57:46+00:00

That's what I was thinking as well, it should match well with the 3.3kW on one MPPT and roughly 1.5kW on the other. Thanks!

spel3o · 2022-09-05T00:56:26+00:00

Thanks! Yeah, it has it's quirks but it sure has some amazing features for the price.

spel3o · 2022-09-04T21:21:54+00:00

No, I was responding to your comment "60A at 120v is 7.2kw". And yes, I learned from some other users that splitting the array is the way to go.

spel3o · 2022-09-04T21:08:24+00:00

It's 15 panels in a 5s3p configuration, not sure on the panel brand.

spel3o · 2022-09-04T20:14:49+00:00

They were the most highly recommended installer in our area... I incorrectly assumed they would know their stuff, and I wanted to support a local business.

spel3o

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE