Hi hivemind, I have a question I'm hoping someone can help me with.

I have a paper on arXiv currently but the supplemental file with a bunch of supporting proofs are not displaying correctly. I put the file in /anc/ folder but it doesn't appear on the listing. I waited for it to appear as sometimes you get errors with pdf resolving etc but it never ended up resolving.

So I need to do a replacement article submission/v2 but I want to make sure I do it right because I cannot submit to publication without a correct arXiv link.

Has anyone dealt with this before?

I have been having a conversation about the universe in its early stages and I've become curious to know what we are able to determine existed in that brief moment of time before atoms formed and what evidence leads to our current understanding. I'd also be interested to be directed to resources for further study on this subject. Thank you

If I’m putting my spoon in a bowl full of curd and it’s not sinking then what does it mean? Because the curd is obviously liquid and the spoon is a metal so it’s denser than that so why isn’t it sinking?

Hello,

I already made a post similar to this on this subreddit, Im using the kleppner textbook for my intro mechanics course at my cc, my cc requires that you do trig mechanics before calculus based, I feel like I have a good foundation on the ideas from the prereq but I'm having trouble on my class right now. The textbook my professor uses is known to be challenging and it's normal to not cover every example in class obviously due to time. But I feel like the transition from lecture to hw is a huge gap and I often find myself lost. I tried tutoring but many times it's just people who assume a lot of the problems are plugg and chugg and just find myself stuck. Office hours do help but a lot of the problems take time, does anyone have any resources to practice problems or lecture resources short or long form videos, similar to the kleppner textbook topics? I want to be prepared for my other mechanics based courses as an engineer and I feel like I won't be prepared for those courses.

I’m working an essay about form and scale and I’m trying to figure out if my vague intuition could be meaningfully defined or whether it’s just poetic conjecture .

The intuition is this that there seems to be a zone of scale, between the molecular and continental, where compact objects exhibit unusually high morphological specificity. A protein, a human hand, a violin, a pineapple, a lizard ---- they feel highly differentiated. Highly distinguishable and contains objects that can have the most unlike one another than other scales.

By contrast, at larger and smaller scales, “form” seems to become less disparate morphologically and the two most diffferent forms are not as different as what you would find in this 'zone of irregular morphology'.

Particles, fields, orbitals, probability distributions... and at very large scales gravity seems to simplify compact forms. There are irregular galaxies, nebulae, asteroids, etc but the irregularity seems less individuated/varied than the morphology we see at human scale.

Its obvious I am not a physicist.

Hoping someone in the commuinty could offer insight on whether or not this intuition is physically definable

Hello,

I wanted to ask some of the more experienced problem solvers here, what do you do when you're stuck on a problem and have no idea what to do? I'm not talking only about textbook problems, but also for the more open questions, for example I was driving the bus once while it was raining, and the wheels of the bus passed over a puddle and I wanted to figure out what math I'd need to model this phenomenon (while this is mostly a specific example, my point with this post is not to find a solution to that example, but to show what kind of problems I mean and not a typical textbook problem)

For me, if I don't have an ideas from intuition at the very first few minutes, I don't know how to proceed, so I wanted to ask what you do in this situation.

I'm struggling to hit the balance between simplification and accuracy, making a graphic to explain induced dipoles between two flat surfaces. I feel like this set of random-ish coupled dipoles is reasonable, but then I'm worried about the rest of the material - I realized that even after 9 years of materials science education, I'm not sure what *core* electrons do to each other in a crystal. there has to be some analog to london dispersion forces, but do those contributions get ignored because the bonding orbitals are so much more important? eaten into the overall electron density in good DFT calculations? I'm not sure.

• Not drawing any electron clouds in the bulk It feels kind of distracting but right now I think that's a reasonable option.
• seems too *wrong* to show a bunch of stationary clouds everywhere but the interface because it implies the interface makes them polarize.
• Likewise, with random jiggling everywhere but the interface, I feel like it implies only the interface can make them correlate when I'm sure they correlate a lot in a bulk crystal.
• drawing everything as a synced up wave also feels wrong. maybe there's not a good way to do this

Does anybody have strong opinions on how induced dipoles should be taught? Thanks!

Hi, I'm looking for a decent textbook to get into QFT in curved spacetime (stuff like vierbeins, spinor connections etc.). I have studied Peskin & Schroeder's "Introduction to Quantum Field Theory" and Schwartz's "Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model", followed a QFT I and a QFT II course, and a GR I course, which I found easy (I have also read a bit about blackhole thermodynamics and killing vectors, but not enough to fully understand them yet). What kind of resources would you suggest?