Gregor

I use Sidebery & auto tab discard -- most of them are basically glorified bookmarks

Mountains are simply the best, the Magratheans really nailed it there

Ailefroide which is in the french alps

spent a week w good friends and had a stupid amount of fun

no such thing

it's what wavefunctionals are trying to do? but it's (necessarily ig) not separable

Introduction to Black Hole Thermodynamics These notes aim to provide an introduction to the basics of black hole thermodynamics. After explaining Bekenstein's original proposal that black holes have entropy, we discuss Hawking's discovery of ...

I think so; this is related to the scrambling time of a black hole, which is supposed to be very small. Witten briefly discusses this at the end of his introduction to BH thermodynamics (p 119)

(ok it's still not fallen into the white hole region in the technical sense. but only bc that's in the past; more effectively it has fallen into the stellar object and won't come out)

destroy the fine-tuning and make a black holes out of the white hole (so that it's bipartite like the Schwarzschild)

I think it only cannot fall into the white hole region bc the whole system, including the pebble, is fine-tuned to that effect. Say you have a white hole fine-tuned for an otherwise empty universe and then you modify a cauchy slice in order to include the pebble. I think the pebble would fall in,

though I would say in any case that if you're happy to call the sun attractive despite ejecting lots of neutrinos and not much of anything falling into it then you should also call a white hole attractive despite possibly ejecting stuff etc

Or maybe you could say a white hole is an incredibly fine-tuned object to begin with and speaking of the entropy of a 'generic' white hole doesn't make sense. But then asking about the interaction with another object is underspecified: it depends on the details of the fine-tuning!

I think I stand by something I've said on here in the past, that a white hole ejecting (non-Hawking radiation) matter makes about as much sense as a candle unburning, it decreases entropy

I didn't read any papers about this but that does sound like exactly what I had in mind

but a sheaf of event spaces (members of which are called states) on space. Local observables are random variables on these (given some probability measure representing our ignorance of the hidden vars), and then EPR/Bell says that this can't describe reality, or 'states aren't a sheaf'

so I randomly remembered that we'd talked ab this before but came to an unsatisfying conclusion and wanted to set the record straight. I think you were right in that thread but the way to formalize it is a bit different. What a local hidden-variable theory should be is not a sheaf of pdfs,

a Riemannian spin mfld will give you a (commutative) spectral triple, but not every commutative spectral triple arises in this way!

I used to think he was a knowingly evil kind of guy, but I suspect he's actually driven to comical mental contortions trying to justify all the things that got him money and power as not evil but good and virtuous, actually. 'Disney villain' is the logical conclusion of this self-reinforcing loop

EM is also linear, so whatever mode decomposition you have at the start will continue to hold

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committ...

oh, we did well then. Actually I think the 2nd game was 8, the first one 10. I remember thinking that action cards could be a bit too powerful, but maybe that goes away when you get more familiar with them and are better able to plan for them

I would say 'pull off a scheme' but my most lasting memory is attempting and failing one of these. I remember afterwards debating with another player ab whether I should have taken a certain gamble, and writing a Markov chain to settle the argument ^^

I've played 2 games of this in my life, they took like 8hrs each (maybe bc all of us were playing for the first time). There's a lot of politicking; but it's incredibly fun to execute some scheme you've been planning for the last 2 hrs

I like limitable the most out of your options, I also like continuable. Maybe steady?

I don't like accumulative so much bc accumulation is weaker than convergence and also it feels to me like a property attached to a point in the target not in the source

I sometimes think ab this Vonnegut quote
“During the Vietnam War... every respectable artist in this country was against the war. It was like a laser beam. We were all aimed in the same direction. The power of this weapon turns out to be that of a custard pie dropped from a stepladder six feet high”

damn I hope their cheese hadn't gone bad, they shouldn't need flicking I think

infuriate an audience of geometers by explaining 'physical states don't form a sheaf over space'

the central vertex is on corsica so everyone has to dodge the maggot cheese

oh. here I thought the right way was to learn alg geo and perform a kind of cross-discipline pattern-matching

I didn't know about Fell's theorem. But for instance for spont. symm. breaking the sectors separate bc of what goes on at spatial infinity, we have no chance of distinguishing them here. If the world looks like a given vacuum in a large bubble around us, using that sector is a good approximation