/sci/ - Science & Math

>we fucking made it on the 9-3-3-3 miracle

>/a/ got 6 saves and 10 man abuse
Guess we're playing to avoid humiliation come sunday.

Is Glass a solid or is it a liquid?
Discuss, because I've heard the argument that the only reason why old centuries old glass pieces is heavier at the bottom are because of earlier glass blowing techniques, and not because it's actually a liquid with a high viscosity.

>>11470303
This is going to be hilarious, UK is literally engaging in defeatism and passing it off as some galaxy brain plan, while using questionable and outright wrong assumptions to justify it.
>mfw Anglos fuck themselves raw

Since DNA/RNA is a data storage medium, what is the approximate bandwidth of one ejaculation?

>>9774150
The topological class of your model is classified by its discrete (Clifford algebraic) symmetries. On a simply connected (i.e. defect-less) manifold, having all 3 CPT symmetries with T squaring to 1 puts you in the DIII class, which is topological trivial in 4 dimensions. This manifests as the topological anomaly-freeness of the quantum theory.
Now the presence of a defect can change this topological class, and how it changes depends on the codimension of the defect. This introduce a singularities in your manifold.
What this means is that, if you see topological anomalies in the theory, then either there are fundamental excitations (quasiparticles) in the theory whose ground state breaks CPT, or you have some kind of singularity in the manifold. The former is (actually both are) an option in condensed matter theory, where the many-body nature of the phenomena to be described gives theorists the freedom to create all sorts of fictitious quasiparticles. Defects can also be introduced as domain walls, vortices or point "topological" effective charges in this context.
In high-energy, however, the theory is inherently single-body: all interactions between the fundamental particles are mediated by gauge bosons, so they do not directly talk to each other. If you wish to form quasiparticles to explain the topological anomaly, then you cannot call your theory "a theory of fundamental particles", since quasiparticles are fictitous (unless you introduce them into the theory a priori, like quarks, but that's just moving the goalpost). If this is not an option, then you have to introduce singularities in the manifold, which would lead to the existence of (actual, not effective) cosmological defects.
In the QCD chiral U(1) anomaly characterized by Z2, it can be taken into account by the existence of a cosmological string around which the vacuum ground states of an ensemble of quarks wind. This is the theta parameterization.

>>9765283
Based Lurie does it again. Absolute lad
>mfw centrally extending the Lie structure by C* and obtain a quantized description

>>8767380
>It is more physics-centric than math centric.
Wrong, but I wouldn't expect you to know that since you're a reactionary towards anything that isn't borne out of abstract gibberish.

Before I go ahead and take a nap I'd just like to say that making category theory my bitch is an incredible turn on.