How do you guys do the "no contact" thing?

Post Reply New Topic

I wasn't trying to discuss it with the woman in question. The way the topic came up is that Luhluhluh said that maybe the reason my physics career doesn't work out is similar to the reason why my dating life doesn't work out -- so this got me talking about career.

As a side note, I was, in fact, always wanting to date a mathematician or a physicist -- that's part of a reason why I couldn't get over that girl from 2005 that I mentioned in the middle of my "57" discussion: she was a graduate student in math at the time. But since most women reject me, that's why I am settling on women that don't have those qualifications.

And I am well aware that Magz is happily married. When I talked to her about physics I was just talking in the sane way I would have talked if a man asked me those questions: I wasn't trying to start anything.

Incidentally, there is one more example of a woman who is a scientist (although she is a biologist) who is happily married. I met her in that Adventist club over a decade ago that I talked about. But three years ago I was nostalgic so I went to Adventist Church and my dreams came true: I ran into her -- even though that club was in Michigan while this church is in New Mexico. So she *would have been* the best of both worlds: both an Adventist from that very club on the past and a scientist too. But too bad: she is married as of now.

As far as this Adventist girl I talk about in this post -- no she is not a scientist -- and she is also much less attractive than that other Adventist girl that is. But like I said I am trying to settle. Also -- long before I did the no contact thing -- I actually told the Adventist girl that isn't a scientist about the other Adventist girl that is. I was wondering if she knew her since she said she visited that club twice. But she doesn't remember her although she knows very well two other girls -- whom I miss as well -- but they are also happily married as of now. In that conversation -- again long before the no-contact thing -- I gave the non-scientist Adventist a contact info of scientist Adventist but she said she didn't want to call her since she doesn't know her.

But back to what you were saying:

1. No, I didn't try to talk about science to non-scientist Adventist. The way this topic cane up is that Luhluhluh asked if my troubkebin career is similar to the one in relationships

2. Yes I strongly prefer physicist to non physicist, I am just settling since nobody likes me

3. Yes I knew Magz is married so I wasn't trying to attract her or anything. I would have responded to physics questions from a man too.

I can imagine you have visual imagination but fundamentally, when photons have enough energy to completely disrupt the state, "visual" is not an applicable characteristics.


Is that all? One semester of quantum physics, another course with second quantisation and that's all?
No quantum optics, nuclear physics, solid state physics, QED, QCD...?
I "got" second quantisation on the quantum optics course. The beam of light is well-described by infinite number of possible photons with probabilities summing up to something finite, so the overall energy is finite.

And... sorry, I know it's all off-topic but you know how special interests work

Lol, you now, finding a man compatibile with someone like me wasn't easy... I was lucky
I mean, I don't look bad and my social skills are not bad for an Aspie but my interests make men very uncomfortable in the long run and very little can stand their ground with me. Learned it the hard way, they freak out after a few months.

I think QFT is quite intellectual but finding someone slightly off your precise interests can be healthier - you can't compare yourself to each other so you don't fall into competition.
I think, maybe QFT would be most successful (in terms of healthy long-term relationship) looking for people on Philosophy department? They usually have more females than Math or Physics. Some courses in Philosophy could be interesting by themselves and socializing with people there may be a pleasure on its own.
Just a thought.

<sorry if something was wrong with my posts, drunk posting on Saturday night>

Women in the culture I live in often deem things that are “geeky” to be “weird” or even terrifying. They would rather read sappy romance novels, religious authors like Joyce Meyer, or regular fiction from authors like James Patterson or Janet Evanovich, watch tv shows like Downton Abbey (they mispronuncevit as “Downtown”), don’t play video games unless they are in the extreme minority who like Candy Crush, and listen to only pop or country music unless they are ghetto and prefer rap and R&B.

Thats called "shoving things under the rug": you are basically saying "don't try to find logic since its all confusing anyway". Well, the reason that I don't buy it is that there *is* a clear pattern -- the one described by all those equations. So clearly its "not" the issue of "everything being disrupted" -- that "other" pattern you see was not disrupted. So then the question is: how can I understand the logic behind that other pattern -- and visualize it too.



One thing to keep in mind is that American education system is far behind Eastern Europe. I guess my only reference point is Russia, but I am assuming other Eastern European countries, including Poland, would be similar to Russia.

So the way American education system is set up is this. They spend four years doing Bachelors and then they spend 5 or 6 years doing Ph.D. First two years of Ph.D. is equivalent to Masters, so they don't have to get Masters if they plan on going to Ph.D. program since they will do its equivalent anyway. But some students might get Masters along the way in case they can't pass Ph.D. and others get Masters if they are about to get kicked out. But in any case, the first two years of Ph.D. program is when they do graduate courses, and then after they finished those two years they no longer do any more courses.

Now, in terms of subjects, I would say Russian third year is the same as American first year. As far as American first year, its Russian high school for sure; as far as American second year it depends on what subjects you compare -- some are outside Russian high school others aren't -- but they are all behind Russian first year of university.

Like if you take mathematics, then in America they do single variable calculus first year of university, then they do multivariable calculus the first semester of the second year of university, and then they do linear algebra the second semester of the second year, and then they do real analysis the third year. But if you look at Russia, they do single variable calculus in high school, and then they do real analysis first year of university. I don't think they ever do multivariable calculus in Russia -- so thats how multivariable calculus during first semester of second year in America is simultaneously ahead of Russian high school and behind of Russian first year of university. Incidentally, back in 1996, my mom's landlord rented out a room to two American university students. One of them studied at Poland for a while -- I don't remember how it happened it was a very long time ago. But he told me that, in Poland, they study multivariable calculus in high school. So I guess if you compare America to Poland instead of Russia then first semester of a second year is still Polish high school.

If you look at physics, then in America during the first semester of the first year they don't do physics at all, they are just studying calculus that is needed for physics. During the second semester of the first year they do Newtonian mechanics. During the first semester of a second year they do thermal physics and electrodynamics. During the second semester of the second year they do relativity and quantum mechanics. All of this is part of Russian high school but I would say that quantum mechanics goes a bit beyond it. I mean in Russian high school they don't do things like particle in the box or harmonic oscilator -- but they do do things like structure of an atom and so forth. And, regardless, what they do in American first two years of university is way below the level of Russian university. So I would characterize it as more deep level of Russian high school or something like that.

As far as Russia, they do classical mechanics in the 9-th grade, then they do thermodynamics and electromagnetism in 10-th grade, and then they do relativity and quantum mechanics in the 11-th grade. So Russian 9-th grade is like American 1-st year of university, Russian 10-th grade is like first semester of American second year, and Russian 11-th grade is like American second semester of the second year. So, to give American some credit, they spend half a year on what in Russia they spend a year -- but thats due to the fact that in high school -- of both countries -- they study slower than they do at the university. So since in Russia its part of high school, they do it slower. But still Russians are ahead just from the fact that they have it as part of high school on the first place.

What puts Americans behind -- as far as high school goes -- is that in America they have "concentrated courses". Like in American high school you are supposed to take only one year of physics, one year of biology, one year of chemistry, etc -- and then each student can choose which year they want to take what. Like for example in my case (I moved to America when I was at the 8-th grade), I took biology when I was in the 10-th grade and I took chemistry when I was in 11-th grade; someone else could have done it in a different order. But in Russia its different. In Russia they do all three of those subjects every year. Thats why it "looks like" they are going slower -- since they don't have a luxury of only concentrating on one subject while putting the others off for the next year -- but at the same time they are ahead of America since they were studying them every year as opposed to Americans who only had one year to do everything.

Now, if you look at American third year of university, then in math they do real analysis (meaning that they do things like Dedikind cuts and so forth) and in physics they do classical dynamics (meaning they do Lagrangians, Hamiltonians, etc). Both of this corresponds to the first year of Russian university. Thats why I say that American third year is like Russian first year. Also, in their third year, they return to things like classical electrodynamics -- but they study it with much more difficult equations -- so I would say it corresponds to Russian university as well; I actually have "classical electrodynamics" book in Russian -- which I am guessing is part of Russian university program. But I am not sure which year they do it in Russia. I am guessing the first year -- seeing how they do it in their third year in America and how the other third year American course (classical dynamics) corresponds to Russian first year. And also American third year is when they have more serious course on first quantization. What I mentioned them doing in the second semester of second year doesn't really count as quantum mechanics: I think they spend first half of it -- at least -- on relativity, and only come to the quantum mechanics at the end. But during the third year they have full year course (two semesters) specifically on quantum mechanics. But it is only the first quantization

Then, during the fourth year, in America they do solid state and thermal physics. And by thermal physics I mean a different version of it than what they do in the second year. So in the second year they do classical version of it, and during the fourth year they do quantum version of it. Now, in Russian high school they only do classical version of it -- they do it in 10-th grade. So logic says that quantum version of it is part of Russian university. From this I can conclude that American first semester of second year is like Russian 10th grade, since both of them are focused on classical thermodynamics and electromagnetism, while 4-th year of American university corresponds to some unknown semester of Russian university; I don't know where that unknown semester is, but it is definitely part of Russian university just because its not part of Russian high school. They also do particle physics in American fourth year as well.

Then, in the first year of American graduate school, they again do classical dynamics and classical electrodynamics -- on a yet deeper level than they did as undergrads. They also do quantum mechanics during the first year of graduate school again. Then, during the second year, they do quantum field theory and particle physcs -- on a graduate level that is supposed to be harder than the undergrad level. There are also graduate level solid state physics and graduate level thermal physics that some students might take -- but that is optional, whether you take it or not depends on your area of research.

In any case, back to what we were talking about, which is quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. I have no idea when they do those things in Russia since I moved to America when I was at the 8-th grade. But let me describe when they do those things in America. Like I mentioned earlier, they first introduce the concept of first quantization during the second half of second semester of second year (the first half of second semester of second year is relativity). But they only do particle in the box and harmonic oscillator and thats it. Then, during the third year, they have the full year course on first quantization. And yes, its only first quantization. Then during the fourth year they do solid state physics and quantum thermodynamics. Then, in graduate school, they return to quantum mechanics. The first semester of first year of graduate school its again only the first quantization. Then, during the second semester of first year of graduate school it depends on university -- in some universities its still only the first quantization, and in other universities its the second quantization. Then all of the second year of graduate school its quantum field theory.

Now, I was ahead of the program -- at least at first -- but then fell behind. So let me describe how I went. So in Russia they start first grade at the age of 7 and in America they start it at the age of 6. Also, in Russia they moved from 10 year system to 11 year system, so they skipped over 4-th grade: I went from 3-rd grade straight to 5-th grade, as did everyone in my class (on the other hand, in America, they do 12 years, and no they didn't change the number of years they do, it was always 12). So when I finished Russian 8-th grade and came to America my mom decided to put me again at the 8-th grade, thinking that Russian 8-th grade was really 7-th grade since we skipped over 4-th grade. That was totally ridiculous since, as I kept telling you, America is BEHIND Russia yet my mom acted like it was the opposite I guess my mom's real reason was that I act infantile otherwise so she felt like I wasn't ready for high school. In any case, when I was in the 8-th grade in America, my mom arranged for me to take AP Calculus in high school -- so I would come to junior high for all my other classes and then after classes go to high school to attend AP Calculus class. And by the way in case you ask -- I still say that Calculus in America is part of university -- its just that they have a thing called "AP classes" where high school students can study the university material. But I already knew all the material since my dad taught me calculus back in Russia when I was finishing 6-th grade (so I was ahead of both Russia and America in this regard). I guess the only thing I learned from that class was the Taylor series at the end of the year.

Then, throughout high school, I was taking university math classes. So my mom arranged for me to be able to attend my university classes -- that coincided in time with my high school classes. During the 9-th grade I took the second year university math classes, and during 10-th grade I was taking third and fourth year university math classes. I didn't finish all of them but only some of them. As far as physics goes, due to my behavior they didn't let me take university physics -- so my mom arranged for me to take physics at the community college.

Now, since you are from Poland, I should clarify the meaning of "college" -- which means different things between Russia and America. So in Russia if they don't do well in 8-th grade, then instead of going to high school at the 9-th grade, they go to "college". So "college" is easier version of high school for people that didn't do well. They usually train them to be builders or something like that, since they aren't good enough to have more intellectual professions. In America, on the other hand, "college" means something completely different. In America, "college" refers to undergraduate part of university career. So if I am talking about first four years of American university, I can call it either university or college depending on how I like. On the other hand, some people in America weren't able to get admitted into the university -- and then they go to what is called "community college". In community college they do first two years of university and they give you associate degree (in comparison to what they give at the end of the four years, which is bachelors) and, after getting associate degree, they can try again to get into university. Now, as far as "community college" goes, they don't use the word university, they only use the word "college". So me, personally, I like to use the word "university" to describe four year thing and I like to use the word "college" to describe two year thing.

In any case, community college in America would be more advanced than high school, since its for people that have completted high school and couldn't get into the university. On the other hand, the college in Russia is behind high school, since it is for people that couldn't get into high school due to not doing well. So I have a joke: Russian college is at the same exact level as American college. After all, Russian college is meant to replace Russian high school, and American college is meant to replace first two years of American university. Since Russian high school is the same as first two years of American university, this means that Russian college is the same as American college. I guess this joke won't work if you use the word "college" to describe university like many people do. That is part of the reason why I want to only use the word "college" in reference to "community college", since that is what would make this joke work so nicely. But what about Poland, how do they use the word "college" over there?

In any case, back to what I was saying. So throughout high school I was taking math classes at the university and physics classes at community college. So I was kind of running around between three places: university where I take math classes, community college where I take physics classes, and high school where I take everything else. Because of this, I was actually behind in the classes other than math and physics. But, despite being behind, I decided to graduate a year early. As I mentioned earlier, in America they graduate after 12-th grade, but I decided to graduate after 11-th grade. So, during 11-th grade, I had a lot of catching up to do on the classes other than math and physics. My mom arranged for me to be able to take more classes than students are allowed to, so I could graduate.

Now, even though I was already taking third and fourth year university math classes while in high school, only took some of them, not all of them. So when I started the university, I continued to take the math classes from the third and fourth year. As it happened, the very first semester I took analysis class -- which is the class people usually take at the beginning of the third year -- but when I was in high school I skipped it in favor of other classes. And as far as physics I took classical dynamics when I first started the university -- which is again something that most students take at the beginning of the third year -- and in case of physics that was because I never took third or fourth year physics prior to that (like I said I was taking physics at the community college because of my behavior and community college only does first two years). So, since both third year math and third year physics correspond to Russian first year -- and also since I took both of them when I started my first year in university -- I actually matched Russia in this regard. Which doesn't look that good since I used to be ahead of Russia as well (especially when my dad taught me calculus at the end of 6-th grade) but I guess I made myself feel better because there were other third and foruth year courses that I took while I was in high school -- so I was still ahead of Russia, I simply took classes in a different order.

In any case, I decided to graduate from university a year early as well. In America they spend 4 years doing Bachelor's. In Europe they usually spend 3 years. In Russia, there is no such thing as Bachelor. Russian deploma is like Masters, and it takes 5 years to get it -- and since in Europe they do 3 years on Bachelors and 2 years on Masters, I would say Russia is like Europe, so I might as well call the end of Russian third year as Bachelor. But in any case, while in Europe they spend 3 years getting Bachelor, in America they spend 4 years. I first wanted to spend 2 years, but I couldn't -- due to the breadth requirenment classes (on other topics) that I was behind on -- so I spent 3 years -- still a year faster than America but exactly as much as in Europe. But, as far as math and physics goes, during my first year I took only undergrad classes, during the second year I was taking a mixture of undergrad and grad classes and during the thrid year I was taking exclusively grad classes -- yes we are allowed to take graduate classes as undergrads, although its not common.

But the big mistake that I made is that I didn't realize that I should have gotten to particle physics and quantum field theory as fast as I could. Instead, I was simply focusing on the level on which I was taking a class. So, ironically, I was *behind* American undergrads in physics in a sense that American undergrads typically take particle physics, but I decided to skip over that class so that I could take graduate level physics as fast as I could. I also assumed that the sequence of graduate classes should be the same as the sequence of undergrad classes. So I took first classical mechanics, then I took thermodynamics, and only after that I was going to take quantum mechanics. But I was wrong. In graduate school, they take classical mechanics and quantum mechanics in parallel -- they start both at the first semester of the first year. On the other hand, thermodynamics USES quantum mechanics -- on a graduate level -- so it comes after that. And, for that reason, I actually had hard time keeping up with thermodynamics since it assumed the knowledge of quantum mechanics that I didn't have. On the other hand, the graduate classical mechanics class was completely useless as far as my career is concerned -- I don't need it in order to understand any other classes. Well, yes, I have to take it in order to get a ph.d. (and, even though I was an undergrad, I got out of the requirenment to take it as a grad student since I already took it as an undergrad) but the point is that I didn't have to hurry up to take it the way I did, I should have probably focused on classes like particle physics and quantum mechanics/field theory, and I should have postponed graduate classical dynamics till the last moment. But I guess I wasn't thinking of what subject would actually help me. I was more thinking of "I should take graduate class so that I can be proud of taking it as an undergraduate" and then I naturally took classical dynamics since I was making that wrong assumption that they use the same sequence in grad classes as they do with undergrad which wasn't true.

In any case, I never taken undergraduate particle physics -- which was one mistake -- and I only took graduate quantum mechanics when I actually started graduate school -- which was the other mistake. On top of that, as I mentioned earlier, the first semester of graduate quantum mechanics is only the first quantization, while the second semester of graduate quantum mechanics at some universities is first quantization and in others its second quantization, and second year of graduate school is second quantization everywhere. Now, when I started graduate school I went to the University of Minnesota (I transferred to Michigan later). So, at Minnesota, the whole first year of graduate school was the first quantization, then they had two more years of second quantization. So the natural question is: how can it be total of three years, if they are supposed to be done with all the courses by the end of the second year? So I was going around the department and asking this question. And I got two kinds of answers: one was "if you know the material you can skip the first year", the other was "not everyone need to take all of quantum field theory". Now, despite all of my past ambition, I couldn't really accept the first answer. After all, the way it worked in the past, is that I formally took all the classes, I just did it earlier than most people. But in this case, I never actually took the first year of graduate quantum mechanics, yet they were saying I can skip it anyway. So I didn't listen to them and didn't skip it. But then, in the middle of my first year, I regretted it and decided to jump ahead to "undo" this mistake. But the problem is that the first semester of a second year isn't offered in the spring. So I had to jump to the second semester of the second year -- which I wasn't ready for since in the first semester of the second year they do the second quantization as well. So, over the winter break, I studied the second quantization to get ready for the second year. But winter break wasn't enough for me to study it. But I didn't want to admit that I didn't fully understand it since I regretted the fact that I didn't take it the first semester so I wanted to "undo" what I regreted. So thats how I fell behind: I told my advisor I know it when I didn't, so he was giving me readings that assume this knowledge that I dont have and I had to catch up on it behind his back instead of reading what he asked me to read. I still managed to pass the classes that I wasn't ready for without fully understanding the material, but I couldn't keep up with the thesis research.

Anyway, here is the list of the math and physics classes I was taking:

8-th grade: AP Calculus (12-th grade in America)

1-st semester of 9-th grade: Linear algebra (2-nd semester of 2-nd year in university in America)

2-nd semester of 9-th grade: Multivariable calculus (1-st semester of 2-nd year in university America)

1-st semester of 10-th grade:

Complex analysis (4-th year of university in America)
Classical mechanics (1-st semester of community college in America)

2-nd semester of 10-th grade:

Abstract Algebra (3-rd year of university in America)
Differential geometry (4-th year of university in America)
Classical Thermodynamics and Classical electromagnetism (2-nd semester of community college in America)

1-st semester of 11-th grade:

Relativity and quantum mechanics (1-st semester of 2-nd year of community college in America)

2-nd semester of 11-th grade:

Nothing. I was catching up on my high school classes so I can graduate.

1-st semester of 1-st year at university

Real analysis (1-st semester of the 3-rd year of American university)
Classical dynamics (1-st semester of the 3-rd year of American university)
Classical electrodynamics (1-st semester of the 3-rd year of American university)

2-nd semester of 1-st year at university

Galois theory (2-nd semester of the 3-rd year of American university)
Classical electrodynamics (2-nd semester of the 3-rd year of American university)
Quantum thermodynamics (4-th year of American university)
First quantization of quantum mechanics (1-st semester of the 3-rd year of American university)

1-st semester of 2-nd year at university

First quantization of quantum mechanics (2-nd semester of 3-rd year of American university)
Physics laboratory (3-rd year of American university)
Set theory (3-rd year of American university)
Real analysis (1-st semester of 1-st year American graduate course)

2-nd semester of 2-nd year of university

Solid State Physics (4-th year of American university)
General Relativity (4-th year of American university)
Real Analysis (2-nd semester of 1-st year American graduate course)
Manifolds (Graduate level course -- I don't know if its 1-st year or 2-nd year)

1-st semester of the 3-rd year

Quantum thermodynamics (2-nd year graduate course in America)
Classical Dynamics (1-st semester of 1-st year American graduate course)
Abstract Algebra (1-st semester of 1-st year graduate course)

2-nd semester of 3-rd year

Classical electrodynamics (2-nd semester of 1-st year American graduate course)
General relativity (graduate level course; I don't know if its 1-st year or 2-nd year)

1-st semester of 1-st year of graduate school

First quantization of quantum mechanics (1-st semester of 1-st year of American graduate school)
Riemannian geometry (American graduate course; don't know what year)
Mathematics for physicists (1-st semester of 1-st year of American graduate school)

2-nd semester of 1-st year graduate school

First quantization of quantum mechanics (2-nd semester of 1-st year of American graduate school)
Riemannian geometry (American graduate course; don't know what year)
Quantum field theory (2-nd semester of 2-nd year graduate course in Minnesota)

1-st semester of 2-nd year of graduate school

Quantum field theory (either 2-nd or 3-rd year graduate course in Minnesota)
Particle Physics (either 2-nd or 3-rd year graduate course in Minnesota)
Lie groups (1-st semester of 1-st year graduate course in Minnesota)

2-nd semester of 2-nd year graduate school

Particle Physics (either 2-nd or 3-rd year graduate course in Minnesota)
Nuclear Physics (either 2-nd or 3-rd year graduate course in Minnesota)
Lie groups (2-nd semester of 1-st year graduate course in Minnesota)

3-rd year of graduate school

I was done with classes in Minnesota so I wasn't taking anything, just writing Master's thesis

1-st semester of 4-th year of graduate school

I just transferred from Minnesota to Michigan, so here are the courses I was taking:

M-theory (special topics course that usually isn't offered, it was only offered that semester)
Supersymmetry (2-nd year graduate course in Michigan)
Supervised research (focused on string theory)

2-nd semester of 4-th year of graduate school

Particle physics (2-nd semester of 1-st year grad school in Michgian -- yes I taken it in Minnesota but I felt like retaking it since I didn't fully understand it)
Supervised research (foused on string theory)

1-st semester of 5-th year in grad school

Supersymmetric particle physics (1-st semester of 2-nd year grad school in Michigan)
Supervised research (focused on supersymmetry)


2-nd semester of 5-th year grad school

Statistics (1-st year grad course)
String theory (its not usually offered, it was offerend just this semester)

In any case, I probably forgotten some courses, since I don't think there were any semesters when I had only two courses -- but it was such a long time ago its hard to remember. But in any case, I never took quantum optics. As far as QCD and QED, they were both part of "quantum field theory" course. And, as far as solid state and nuclear physics, I took them (I took solid state as undergraduate and I took nuclear physics in graduate school).

Then -- several years later -- I started my 2-nd Ph.D., and here are the courses I been taking

1-st semster of 1-st year

Differential Equations
Quantum Field Theory
Point Set Topology
Complex Analysis

2-nd semester of 1-st year

Fluid Dynamics
Complex Analysis
Differential Topology
Nonlinear waves
Quantum Information

1-st semester of 2-nd year

Riemannian Geometry
Harmonic Analysis
Reading and Research (focused on Clifford Algebra)

2-nd semester of 2-nd year

Riemannian Geometry
Measure Theory
Reading and Research (focused on Clifford Algebra)
Physics English (I thought they would teach me how to write papers so that they can be published -- but it ended up being quite useless)

1-st semester of 3-rd year

Algebraic Topology
Selected topics in geometry and topology (focused on Riemannian geometry)
Reading and Research (focused on subriemannian geometry)

2-nd semester of 3-rd year

Algebraic Topology
Select topics in partial differential equations
Reading and research (focused on subriemannian geometry)

1-st semester of 4-th year (which is just over)

Commutative algebra (thats the one that I kept talking about in this thread)
Select topics in geometry and topology (focused on subriemannian geometry)
Thesis preparation



I took solid state physics as an undergrad and nuclear physics in graduate school.

As far as QED and QCD, both of them were included in "quantum field theory" course. Which I took in 2-nd year graduate school.

I never took quantum optics.



I never took quantum optics. I first encountered quantum optics when I was doing second postdoc in India. No, I didn't take any classes in India. The way I encountered it is that this was something that my advisor was working on. From my interaction with him, there is a link between quantum optics and quantum inforation. Is this correct? I found the concept of quantum information too abstract. What does the word "information" even mean? In any case, I wasn't working on his projects. I was doing my own thing regarding interpretation of quatnum field theory, which was okay with him.

Incidentally, the graduate school where I am at right now offers quantum optics course. This is strange, since it ranks a lot lower than other universities I been at and it has far fewer courses. I am mostly taking math classes, not physics. But if you think that quantum optics might be useful for me, I will consider taking it. Although I am not sure whether I will take it next semester since it would disract me from thesis research that I need to do. I might take it eventually though.

But its interesting how quantum optics helped you understand second quantization. I mean, on the surface, those topics seem totally different.

Last edited by QFT on 14 Dec 2019, 11:32 pm, edited 3 times in total.

So is your husband also a physicist, or at least a scientist?



So that professor whose class I was using to ghost the Adventist girl is actually a wife of another professor who is my thesis advisor (and whose class I was taking as well). So the husband's area of research is Geometry and the wife's area of research is Abstract Algebra. And both of their daughters are mathematicians too. To me it looks like a perfect family. I really envy them!

As far as competition, I never thought of it. But I guess they can't compete with each other since they work on different areas of math. I do remember, though, how in the middle of the lecture that woman mentioned that her husband was telling her that "algebraists are violent because they keep using terms such as annihilator, assassinator, etc". I guess its sort of a joking type of competition



Incidentally, one thing I was considering doing is that -- if, after my 2-nd Ph.D. in math I won't be able to get a job or a postdoc -- I might go and do 3-rd ph.d. in Philosophy. This would be a way of staying within my area of interests. Just like now when I do 2-nd ph.d. in Math I am trying to keep it relevant to physics, when I will do 3-rd ph.d. in Philosophy I can make it relevant to physics as well: it would be philosophy of physics.

But its only a backup plan. My first priority is obviously to get a postdoc in math and hopefully a professorship. But since postdoc and professorship are competitive, if it won't work out, I might go do 3-rd ph.d. in Philosophy.

I haven't thought about Philosophy in terms of girls -- but thanks for suggesting it, it sounds really interesting. So since I have two more years before getting Math Ph.D., would you suggest I simply go to some events in philosophy department -- such as philosophy lectures -- and see what happens?



I haven't noticed you saying anything wrong. What was it?

No, Hilbert spaces are as logical as any other part of Mathematics. There is perfect logic but physical world in quantum scale fundamentally can't be experienced by vision (or any other sense) as sensors fundamentally disrupt it.
That depends on your kind of imagination. Imaginations are subjective and personal.


Quantum optics, at least on my faculty, simultanously follows two paths:
1. Quantum information - algorithms for quantum computing and quantum cryptography, typically uses 2-state qubits writable as 2x2 matrices and a lot of quantum entanglement;
2. Actual quantum optics - ways to physically obtain states similar enough to quantum information ideas. Mainly, squeezed states of light were used and second quantization was used to describe them.

I have decided that anything that violate the invariance of time and space is crackpot, no matter how accepted it has become in scientific circles. Anything that violate causality is crackpot too.

I did take the Einstein relativity theory course at university and passed it, but I didn't accept its paradoxes back then and today I simply reject it as crackpot since it violates fundamental axioms. And honestly, it's quite possible to explain these issues with alternative theories that don't break fundamental principles of invariance of time and space.

I'm quite sure that all the paradoxes of quantum theory can also be explained in alternative ways that are free of paradoxes.

IMO, these fields have been taken over by religious fanatism,which is why arguments about Big Bang, the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics typically end up with personal attacks rather than real arguments, and of course, if you try to publish anything that goes against these theories it will be rejected based on nonconformity rather than scientific issues.

And in meanwhile, your GPS works because of applying those "crackpot" theories

An engineer, Silicon Valley kind (geographically not in SV but working for them).

Maybe for you it's not an issue. For me it was.


Just a warning, I was drunk when writing it.

Well for me I never accepted a relationship from someone who lived too far away, I mean I had some guys from further away intrested but I could not find it in myself to go out and live with them before meeting them in person, and that is waht both of them seemed to want. But I couldn't do it, it was just to much of a risk with unknown consequences..so from that point forward I did not pursue anything with guys who lived further away and specfically looked for guys in my area...which my boyfriend I have now was within that close by area and he sent me like a page long message of why he wanted to try dating me I don't even remember what it said but it certainly made me want to meet him IRL but I didn't respond to that messege for a month beause I was butthurt about another guy who I had met with and thought we were hitting it off, but then after a couple times we hung out and had sex(he seemed to want it so I went along with it) I texted if he wanted to hang out again and he just said it was kind of fun but he wasn't actually intested in anything long term at all...and if I wanted I could even come have sex one last time. Well I left him with 'alrighty than' and never said anything more than that to him after receiving that message.

Math doesn't always translate to real life, and the same equation can be derived from multiple theories. So just because a GPS device appears to follow crackpot theories doesn't make these theories any less crackpot.

Besides, a common claim is that if a theory makes counterintuitive claims the burden of proof should increase, something that never was adopted for any of these theories. The Big Bang theory obviously is unprovable, and so is much of quantum theory as well as the theory of relativity.

The best proof that the theory of relativity is false is the evidence of doppler effect for light. This proves that the relative movements of matter is additative and not limited to c.

I find small (less than, say, 150 000 citizens) towns generally unwelcoming for geeks. Big cities are better.

Doppler effect for light is readily derivable in special relativity, using high school Math. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativis ... ler_effect

You’re so very smart, Magz.

Do you derive enjoyment from quantum physics when you feel sad?

And you’re smart, too, QFT. Women like it when you speak of ice cream, rather than of their supposed motivations.

It's the classical case of bending theories so they can handle things that disprove them. In this case they had to modify the theory with more strangeness to be able to explain doppler effect for light. The Big Bang theory has added enormous amount of dark matter and energy to fix its predictions.