[Closed] Weird Theories

yeah, stuff had charge, but the quantity 2e was meaningless until we defined both those terms.

Besides, I'm a physicist, so you have to believe me.

The quantity e is not meaningless.. which is why I chose it, it's a natural unit.

Some units are not only natural but fundamental (like the planck length) not a number we've ascribed.

I see what you mean, the Helium nucleus always had a charge resulting from its 2 protons, but that is only 2e because we defined e as the charge of a proton. To say that the charge was always 2e is a bit like saying the metre existed before man, sure there were things that were a metre long. But our naming (and measuring) of these things only came after we defined our terms.

You can use negative numbers to measure things

Electric charge can be both positive and negative

EDIT: do you two never work even I am getting distracted for few minutes

In a counting system the least you can ever have is nothing

yes, but measurement is not the same as counting.

we defined e as the charge of [s]a proton[/s] an electron

Surely?

In any case e is still fundamental to chemistry and hence to lots of things. If we used a unit of f equal to 1.5e then a helium nucleus would be 1 1/3f instead of 2e. It's fundamental to the way the universe works - unlike a metre.

In a counting system the least you can ever have is nothing

No, not at all, hence the concept of debt. Just because -1 apple isn't a physical item doesn't mean it's any less valid. The same is true for physical systems, which is why we have solids with ionic bonds.

EDIT: do you two never work even I am getting distracted for few minutes

of course I do! I'm busy being a mathematician and a physicist

Charlie's job is Internet Physics and Maths liason for the University of Somewhere.

you are getting semantical with me now mmmmhhhhh

Which is nicely metaphorical for our actual conversation.

we defined e as the charge of a proton an electron
Surely?

well, then the charge of the nucleus would be -2e, but yes this is beside the point

In any case e is still fundamental to chemistry and hence to lots of things.

If we used a unit of f equal to 1.5e then a helium nucleus would be 1 1/3f instead of 2e. It's fundamental to the way the universe works - unlike a metre.

sure, but the 2e-ness of it is a human measure. The charge is fundamental but it all worked before we knew it as 2e.

I'm not sure we disagree here.

you are getting semantical

Don't start being Anti-semantic!

Fascist!!

I'm not sure we disagree here.

Probably not. If we stop arguing now before the definitive answer of whether or not we disagree has been ascertained then we will continue to both agree and disagree as two superimposed states.

What's your actual job btw?

What's your actual job btw?

Hircine access control manager.

Hircine access control manager.

You're kidding!

yeah, mainly from sub-transversal sites

can someone explain the IT crowd in joke?

Hircine means goat-like (in the same way bovine means cow-like). Kids are baby goats.

Jokes are like frogs, they die when you dissect them.

I knew that I thought it was a genuine IT job though 😳

See, Hircine access control means i keep an eye on goats which go past, and sub-transversal means i do it from under a bridge.

If I tell you that my catch phrase is "Who's that trip trapping over my bridge?" does it become funny yet?

pulls dunce cap over eyes and refuses to look anymore

I've just been reading, got caught up in the numerical significance of zero. It is interesting that it's more of a philisophical construct because you are envisaging the lack of something. Such as I have zero jaffa cakes left, which also challenges the idea of my afternoon tea. what will I have with it? I feel I am having a philisophical crises. The reality of my tea break is supported by the things that make up that time. With them gone, it's just another ponderous moment with little purpose. on no, what's the point!!