Ciro Santilli @cirosantilli 37

This is a term invented by Ciro Santilli, and refers to a loose set of uncommon Bitcoin inscription methods that involve inscribing one or a small number of payloads per Bitcoin transaction.

These methods are both inefficient and hard to detect and decode, partly because Bitcoin Core does not index spending transactions: bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/61794/bitcoin-rpc-how-to-find-the-transaction-that-spends-a-txo. This makes finding them all that more rewarding however.

On the other hand, they do have the advantage of not depending on any block size limits, as their individual transactions are very small.

Inscribing anything large would however take a very long time, as you'd have to wait until the previous payload chunk is confirmed before going to the next one. This alone makes the format impractical perhaps.

Known examples:

The laplace operator for Minkowski space.

Can be nicely written with Einstein notation as shown at: Section "d'Alembert operator in Einstein notation".

Given the function $\psi$:the operator can be written in Planck units as:often written without function arguments as:Note how this looks just like the Laplacian in Einstein notation, since the d'Alembert operator is just a generalization of the laplace operator to Minkowski space.

The rare ones. Notably present in peptidoglycan.

Dan, if you ever Google yourself here, please contact Ciro Santilli: Section "How to contact Ciro Santilli" to do something with OurBigBook.com. Cheers.

Lecture notes: Quantum Field Theory lecture notes by David Tong (2007).

By David Tong.

14 1 hours 20 minute lectures.

The video resolution is extremely low, with images glued as he moves away from what he wrote :-) The beauty of the early Internet.

Two parallel Josephson junctions.

In Ciro's ASCII art circuit diagram notation:

Relates particle momentum and its wavelength, or equivalently, energy and frequency.

The wavelength relation is:but since:the wavelength relation implies:

Particle wavelength can be for example measured very directly on a double-slit experiment.

So if we take for example electrons of different speeds, we should be able to see the diffraction pattern change accordingly.

Notably, convolution can be implemented in terms of GEMM:

A suggested at Physics from Symmetry by Jakob Schwichtenberg (2015) chapter 3.9 "Elementary particles", it appears that in the Standard Model, the behaviour of each particle can be uniquely defined by the following five numbers:

E.g. for the electron we have:

Once you specify these properties, you could in theory just pluck them into the Standard Model Lagrangian and you could simulate what happens.

Setting new random values for those properties would also allow us to create new particles. It appears unknown why we only see the particles that we do, and why they have the values of properties they have.

Given a matrix $A$ with metric signature containing $m$ positive and $n$ negative entries, the indefinite orthogonal group is the set of all matrices that preserve the associated bilinear form, i.e.:Note that if $A=I$, we just have the standard dot product, and that subcase corresponds to the following definition of the orthogonal group: Section "The orthogonal group is the group of all matrices that preserve the dot product".

As shown at all indefinite orthogonal groups of matrices of equal metric signature are isomorphic, due to the Sylvester's law of inertia, only the metric signature of $A$ matters. E.g., if we take two different matrices with the same metric signature such as:and:both produce isomorphic spaces. So it is customary to just always pick the matrix with only +1 and -1 as entries.

Intuitive definition: real group of rotations + reflections.

Mathematical definition that most directly represents this: the orthogonal group is the group of all matrices that preserve the dot product.

The degree of some algebraic structure is some parameter that describes the structure. There is no universal definition valid for all structures, it is a per structure type thing.

This is particularly useful when talking about structures with an infinite number of elements, but it is sometimes also used for finite structures.

Examples:

Demo under: nodejs/sequelize/raw/many_to_many.js.

NO way in the SQL standard apparently, but you'd hope that implementation status would be similar to UPDATE with JOIN, but not even!

The problem of deletionism is that it removes users' confidence that their precious data will be safe. It's almost like having a database that constantly resets itself. Who will be willing to post on a website that deletes the content they created for free half of the time thus wasting people's precious time?