Quaternions are not the basis for quantum mechanics. Biquaternions have some applications in quantum field theory, but there are many areas of quantum mechanics where there's no need or space for anything above complex.

I know this is a joke, but wrong about what, exactly? I don't get it.

Also, and maybe this has something to do with the joke I'm not getting, the way complex numbers are motivated in school is a lie, and a stupid one. Mathematicians were perfectly comfortable with certain equations having no solutions; the problem was when their equations told them there were no solutions when they could see the solutions: the curve x^3^ - 15x + 4 crosses the x-axis, but Cardano's cubic formula gives up due to negative square roots. Imaginary numbers were originally no more than an ephemeral reasoning tool, and were only reluctantly accepted as entities in their own right because of how damn useful they were.

I think this is more accurately vice signalling.

First encounter with a Lisp, I see.

Lisps aren't like Algols, where delimiters are visual cues for structure; what you're meant to do is ignore them, and focus on indentation instead. The advantage of having them at all instead of doing Python's thing is it's obvious how the parse tree will turn out, which gives macros the power to not suck. Additionally, Parinfer.

They really need to patch this. It's wreaked unbridled havoc on the meta.

That's a pretty weak definition. "Legitimate" especially is a vacuous term, and every form of democracy ever proposed is (theoretically) "accountable".

The Hamiltonian using Hamilton's numbers? Now I think about it it is a bit silly that two entirely separate yet highly propinquitous concepts have such similar names. Physics really went downhill once humans started writing it down.

It's certainly a bad place, by the looks of it.

I think it is not. Certainly most projects aren't solely personal utilities, but devs working for fun rather than profit will almost inevitably produce something skewed towards their own tastes and skills. See: the presentation of any FOSS graphical app vs a paid equivalent.

Hm. I'm not certain if I'm introverted or extroverted or somewhere between; hard to know without people around.

I skimmed the article. Some steps might be possible, some definitely aren't, and some I feel a physical aversion to. Certainly, I can't work through it on my own. I was receiving therapy up until around two months ago (psych said it wasn't helping me anymore and I needed to find someone new, have been unable to interact with new people in any way); I think the problem is deeper, but I don't know what or how.

Whoa there. I detest this post as much as you do, but there's no need to start throwing out baseless accusations. @[email protected] isn't funny at all.

But what medication? I'm on several. I'd need to know what's going on before I know the right meds. I'm seeing my GP in two days, hoping she has any idea what could be happening.

How is that different from the spaces/tabs you type at the beginning of a line though?

You do have a point. Maybe that's why the Door exists: sometimes, humans simply outdo demons.

Yes, I have noticed. One is a conclusion I've come to, the other is...hardwired, I think. That's how it feels anyway.

I was receiving regular therapy until around two months ago. Practitioner said she couldn't help me anymore, gave me a list of others; interacting with new people at all has been near impossible lately, much less rehashing my entire life and situation.

I have the feeling the problem is deeper than psychology: my brain might be physically malfunctioning in some way. I mean, if I'm as self-aware as I am but still can't shift some obviously wrong beliefs, those beliefs must be "bolted down", so to speak. Does that make sense?

Except no because the digits themselves are still big-endian. That's nUxi.

Right, and the most significant bit of the whole date is the first Y in YYYY, which we can't put at the end unless we reverse the year itself. So we can either have pure big-endian, or PDP-endian. I know which one I'm picking.

Your literal statement is also just wrong. The solitary implication of endianness is byte ordering, because individual bits in a byte have no ordering in memory. Every single one has the exact same address; they have significance order, but that's entirely orthogonal to memory. Hex readouts order nybbles on the same axis as memory so as not to require 256 visually distinct digits and because they only have two axes; that's a visual artefact, and reflects nothing about the state of memory itself. ISO 8601 on the other hand is a visual representation, so digit and field ordering are in fact the same axis.

Hah. Church tried to ban it because it was "associated with illegal money trading", I remember that. What is it about maths that makes non-mathematicians think themselves qualified to judge matters they don't understand?

I think I almost understand what you're getting at. If I do, it's uncodifiable. You can't draft an organisational system with a clause that no one is allowed to use logical fallacies to defend it.

I got that, yes.

That's a fallacy. Individuals don't evolve, and neither do whole species; it's populations that evolve, which for humans means tribes. Behaviours that help the tribe's survival mean the whole tribe is favoured, even if the individuals exhibiting those behaviours never reproduce themselves. Why do you think latent genes are a thing? How do you think humans developed things like altruism?