/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11530563
>gamma factor vanishes at [math]v=c[/math]
>this somehow implies [math]t=t'[/math] and [math]l=l'[/math]

Oldschool CS papers:
>This will definitely get us laid this time, we've been virgins for way too long
Newschool CS papers:
>Here are the best brands of thighhigh and stockings on the market. Also don't forget to clean out your chastity cages! :3333
What went wrong?

>>9738923
>If there was an anisotropy like that, our universe wouldn't be rotationally (and hence Lorentz) invariant.
What? Are you retarded? An orthogonal mass matrix gives rise to a perfectly fine Lorentz invariant mass term [math]\overline{\psi}_\mu M^{\mu\nu} \psi_\nu[/math].
Given [math]\Lambda\in SO(3,1)[/math], [math]\psi_\mu \rightarrow \Lambda_\mu^\nu\psi_\nu[/math] so [math]\overline{\psi}_\mu M^{\mu\nu}\psi_\nu \rightarrow \overline{\psi}_\rho (\Lambda^{-1})^\rho_\mu M^{\mu\nu}\Lambda^\sigma_\nu \psi_\sigma[/math], and since for rotations [math]\Lambda^{-1} = \Lambda^T,[/math] [math]M[/math] orthogonal means [math]\Lambda^T M\Lambda = M[/math] and hence [math]\overline{\psi}M\psi \rightarrow \overline{\psi}M\psi[/math]. Think before you speak next time.

>>8969872
Reminder that all closed compact surfaces can be decomposed into gluings of pants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_of_pants_(mathematics)#Pants_decompositions

>tfw Weyl != Weil
?? explain?!?!?