11–20 of 429 posts
Honestly, I'm kind of frustrated now, too many work is close-source in this area. The research paper will tell you everything except how to reproduce this work in minimal effort, it's like they are hiding something.
They also using a `Origin` to plot and MS Word to write paper, which is also non-free licensed, and made them harder to collaborate and reproduce.
A thing of beauty is a joy forever - John Keats Honestly, physics is so full of pretension and hero worship. Even among seasoned lecturers there's a tendency to mythologise the progress of the art by making it sound like all the great results we rely on were birthed fully-formed by the giants who kindly lend us their divine shoulders. Ironically there's a kind of Gell-Mann amnesia here, working scientists know that m…
[1] https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/56892/did-hilber...
(2000) (at most: https://web.archive.org/web/20001031193257/http://www.cs.wis... )
It was probably actually written sometime prior to June 1999, because that's when the author got his Physics BS at Stanford (https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/cv.html).
I kinda want to know more of the backstory around this. What grade did he get? Or was this a private venting exercise he later put up on his webpage, once he was well clear of the course?
The author did eventually go into CS, I wonder if this project was his actual breaking point.
A thing of beauty is a joy forever - John Keats Honestly, physics is so full of pretension and hero worship. Even among seasoned lecturers there's a tendency to mythologise the progress of the art by making it sound like all the great results we rely on were birthed fully-formed by the giants who kindly lend us their divine shoulders. Ironically there's a kind of Gell-Mann amnesia here, working scientists know that m…
Just physics is like this? Hero worship like this is pretty endemic. It’s weird because on one hand it promotes this disempowering mythology that all progress comes from a vanishingly tiny fraction of humanity, but on the other hand people find it inspiring because if heroes exist then it means people (and maybe you!) can do amazing things. It’s a weird double edged sword.
(I also note that any double-edged polyhedral sword is necessarily degenerate.)
A thing of beauty is a joy forever - John Keats Honestly, physics is so full of pretension and hero worship. Even among seasoned lecturers there's a tendency to mythologise the progress of the art by making it sound like all the great results we rely on were birthed fully-formed by the giants who kindly lend us their divine shoulders. Ironically there's a kind of Gell-Mann amnesia here, working scientists know that m…
There's a single instance in Einstein's notebooks where he attempts to use numerical methods to come up with a result. He manually graphs some result of the cosmological constant and then integrates it by counting the squares under the curve.
I took some effort to change my research interest from computer vision to DFT calculation in quantum chemistry. Honestly, I'm kind of frustrated now, too many work is close-source in this area. The research paper will tell you everything except how to reproduce this work in minimal effort, it's like they are hiding something. They also using a `Origin` to plot and MS Word to write paper, which is also non-free licens…
In the area of deep learning based simulations, one good example of an open software is netket. The researcher their is pretty active in terms of github/gitlab/huggingface ecosystem.
I wish universities were better equipped for what you pay. Where is all that money going anyways? Leaking like free electrons?
A thing of beauty is a joy forever - John Keats Honestly, physics is so full of pretension and hero worship. Even among seasoned lecturers there's a tendency to mythologise the progress of the art by making it sound like all the great results we rely on were birthed fully-formed by the giants who kindly lend us their divine shoulders. Ironically there's a kind of Gell-Mann amnesia here, working scientists know that m…
There seems to be a bit of confusion about the Hilbert-Einstein controversy [1], and I believe consensus is that Hilbert derived the equations a few days before Einstein, but did not claim ownership of the research. But this is the first time I'm hearing that Hilbert made a mistake. (I mean, maybe he did, but he got the right result eventually.) [1] https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/56892/did-hilber...
(I certainly count myself among the confused, but I don't think there's any real dispute to answer.)
See also: this work alleging some foul play in the historical record - https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/zna-2004-1016...
(2000) (at most: https://web.archive.org/web/20001031193257/http://www.cs.wis... )
https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/cv.html Looks like he went on get a PhD in CS and is now a staff SWE at Google, according to his LinkedIn. Guess he's rolling in cash after all.
Happy he made the leap and at least get's paid well now (I hope).