physicsdude
Rank #6640 on Comments
Level 222 Comments: Mind Blower Offline
Send mail to physicsdude Block physicsdude Invite physicsdude to be your friend Last status update:  

 
Date Signed Up:  5/13/2012 
Last Login:  7/29/2016 
FunnyJunk Career Stats  
Comment Ranking:  #6640 
Highest Content Rank:  #8873 
Highest Comment Rank:  #3421 
Content Thumbs:  51 total, 83 , 32 
Comment Thumbs:  2800 total, 3351 , 551 
Content Level Progress:  74.57% (44/59) Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here 
Comment Level Progress:  94% (94/100) Level 222 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 223 Comments: Mind Blower 
Subscribers:  0 
Content Views:  10430 
Times Content Favorited:  1 times 
Total Comments Made:  621 
FJ Points:  2340 
Pictures
 Views: 1855Captain Obvious
39 4 Total: +35
Comments: 0
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 05/13/12
 Views: 1764Eurovision winner gained weight
11 5 Total: +6
Comments: 10
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 05/21/14
YouTube
 Views: 3577I'M THE JUGGERNAUT, BITCH
21 5 Total: +16
Comments: 2
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 03/16/14
 Views: 1628Anus
8 4 Total: +4
Comments: 1
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 04/05/13
 Views: 943All time summer hit
4 4 Total: 0
Comments: 1
Favorites: 1
Uploaded: 12/15/14
user favorites
latest user's comments
#9  He sounds exactly like Chris Rock [+] (1 new reply)  07/25/2016 on Triggered by the pokemans  +15 
 
#14  I'm fairly certain a lot of dinosaur species went extinct due …  06/22/2016 on 17  6  2016  0 
#47  They come to understand five after you've explained what five … [+] (2 new replies)  06/17/2016 on Things you might say if you...  +3 
#89 
ChewyConor (06/17/2016) [] Just wanting to say that imaginary numbers are equally as present in reality as all other numbers. Numbers are all theoretical concepts, we just assign them to real things for convenience. It's very difficult to define what makes something a 'whole' thing or 1 of something, instead of 0.99845 or 1.0328 of a thing. Imaginary numbers are often used to describe things in another domain. For example oscillations are described with real numbers to describe their amplitude and wavelength in the physical domain and imaginary numbers to describe their phase in the time domain. There are plenty of examples but that's a big one since just about all forms of kinetic energy is oscillations. #81 
anon (06/17/2016) [] Actually, 5 is a concept that can be learnt without someone else explaining it. Whether you have a shape or a name for it is irrelevant, it's just a concept anyway.  
#38  The problem with that is that math doesn't tell us anything ab… [+] (8 new replies)  06/17/2016 on Things you might say if you...  +4 
#108 
haroldsaxon (06/17/2016) [] Wrong. It's not only wrong, it's spectacularly wrong. Math tells us EVERYTHING about the world and is the only language that is not made up, there are only different dialects (base 10, base 12, base 2...) Math is the only indisputable truth. #44 
anon (06/17/2016) [] Actually, math is the ONLY thing that tells us ANYTHING about the world. That's kind of the point of the comic. Everything in the universe eventually breaks down into math. It can even be used to describe things that don't or can't exist. There are no limits to math. "You can't explain green to a blind man, or vibrato to the deaf, but they can all come to understand five." It's truly a universal language. #47 
physicsdude (06/17/2016) [] They come to understand five after you've explained what five is. The same way you use english to explain what a fucking muffin is. If you ever had scientific theory you would know you can't explain shit from math alone. So you're telling me imaginary numbers are something that exist and can actually be observed in the world and not just a conventional way we've found to make calculating integrals easier? #89 
ChewyConor (06/17/2016) [] Just wanting to say that imaginary numbers are equally as present in reality as all other numbers. Numbers are all theoretical concepts, we just assign them to real things for convenience. It's very difficult to define what makes something a 'whole' thing or 1 of something, instead of 0.99845 or 1.0328 of a thing. Imaginary numbers are often used to describe things in another domain. For example oscillations are described with real numbers to describe their amplitude and wavelength in the physical domain and imaginary numbers to describe their phase in the time domain. There are plenty of examples but that's a big one since just about all forms of kinetic energy is oscillations. #81 
anon (06/17/2016) [] Actually, 5 is a concept that can be learnt without someone else explaining it. Whether you have a shape or a name for it is irrelevant, it's just a concept anyway. #46 
datargumme (06/17/2016) [] All of the sciences listed there tell us something about the world. It can be argued that physics at its fundamental level is just math, which is reasonable to think given that math is so useful to describe everything we deal with in physics. But to say that physics don't tell us anything because math, is simply wrong. A lot of what we know in physics would never have been discovered though pure math, i can see how mathematicians might come up with Newtonian mechanics, like his law of gravity and such. But electromagnetism took more than a hundred years to understand even with a lot of experiments being done, where many of the results were highly counter intuitive. To claim that electromagnetism could have been understood with just math tells me that you have not studied that subject. It gets even worse with Qauntum physics, i can say for certain that such mechanics would not be taken seriously without experiments. One could in principle use solve the SchrÃ¶dinger equation for every molecule, but the calculations that has to be done for even the simplest molecules are immense. Have you tried solving it for simple molecules? Things like DNA would just be hopeless to calculate with those methods. One has to use the methods of chemistry for such systems. The same thing could be argued for biology, cells are huge compared to molecules,and solving the SchrÃ¶dinger equation for such a system is out of the question #113 
anon (06/17/2016) [] "to say that physics don't tell us anything because math, is simply wrong"  no one said that bruh! The view that physics is all about creating mathematical (or loosely mathematical) models of reality is hard to deny. My favorite quote in this regard: Max Tegmark, vimeo.com/album/2675497/video/83602583 , "the only properties the electron has, are mathematical properties." But anyways, there are fields called: "quantum chemistry", "quantum bio", "mathematical physics", so come on, the comic is fine. (To any uninitiated: You don't actually solve the schrodinger equation in those fields, but you use tricks: the renormalization group, which lets you figure out the macro properties of micro classical or quantum systems. Numerical methods, like numerical path integral sampling. Or quasiclassical methods, where you leave one part of the system quantum and assume everything else to be classical) #45 
anon (06/17/2016) [] That...is the most beautiful way of discribing it I have ever heard. Bravo. 10/10. IGN. Praise Gaben.  
#210  "Object" "girlfriend" [+] (1 new reply)  06/07/2016 on No safety for FJ  +3 
#40  I don't, but i damn wish I did. It was much faster [+] (4 new replies)  06/04/2016 on Remember when?  0 
#132 
killerofcows (06/04/2016) [] how was that faster ? if anything I can understand t9 being faster if thats the case I do agree but clicking several times for each letter should in every possible way be slower  
#37  Good thing he quit the modelling job he hated. Wonder how he p… [+] (3 new replies)  06/02/2016 on Guy drops everything, quits...  +1 
#58 
iqequalzero (06/02/2016) [] Be model, get fat pay checks, dont spend that much for everyday living, get fat savings account.  
#48  I'm curious. In what way is entropy random? It's governed pure… [+] (1 new reply)  06/02/2016 on Aerospike Nozzle Rocket...  0 
#52 
downhillGuy (06/02/2016) [] I think they mean entropy is random when applied to individual or small groups of molecules. We know entropy of large systems and can accurately predict general behavior but it is near impossible to accurately predict the entropy changes of an individual molecule in the system. Enthalpy we can predict accurately at any scale of systems.  
#6  Fly you fools [+] (1 new reply)  06/01/2016 on Stupid kibbie  +37 
 
#41  Lost in space  06/01/2016 on thats why metric is better  +5 