Klaynos

! Moderator Note You've had a thread on this. Hi back and read the reason it was closed.

Ok, so you're probably not seeing an optical effect but a result of the camera hardware. The viewfinder is probably a PDF screen rather than an optical viewfinder from an SLR... you can see the wings as stationary as the exposure is much shorter, this is probably due to higher sensitivity sensor on the camera or a larger aperture on the lens. We'd need more details of the old camera and new to say much more.

Then it's not perfectly clean. The static field you generate on that kind of thing will be massive. That field will also add dust onto the plastic film as you move it towards the window. Even in a high class clean room you'd collect dust from the atmosphere with cling film.

How do you clean the plastic? Plastic films tend to have big and varying static fields so collect particles easily from the atmosphere. You are then transferring these to the glass.

It's been a while since my last astrophysics module but I'm pretty sure you can find a classical event horizon using only Newtonian gravity.

Pythons maths, stats ,plotting etc... libs make many many things far easier. I agree python wouldn't be the fastest to run but it'll probably be the fastest to code and run. Which for most science apps is important. Although it does depend on the specific case. If this is something that will need to be run many many times the extra resources required to write it in something like c would make sense.

One trick we used was covering the keyboard so you had no choice but to ignore your hands. I suspect you might know better than you think you do given the time you've spent doing 2 finger typing.

The touch typing programmes are probably the fastest way. It's how I learnt several years ago. You can probably achieve a good standard in quite quick timebwith regular (daily) practice.

I'd agree with python (although it's rarely my language of choice). It is good for data processing and you can do GUI acceptably. My choice would probably to use two languages, one for GUI (depending on exactly what you need) and one for data probably (probably R).

! Moderator Note Quit the personal insults. They're against the rules you agreed to when you signed up.

Congratulations.

Define real.

I always find the clue is in the name.

I've heard a lot of that kind of thing from leave people this morning.

I don't think they should ignore the result. And doing so would probably significantly strengthen some parties. I don't know what our duly elected representatives should do. But whatever it is it should not be rushed. My concern all along had been that we don't really know what an exit deal would look like. That needs to be sorted, calmly and probably slowly.

Yes. As it's so divided I don't think there's an easy answer. A very worrying time.

Less than 50% of the elegable voters. I don't think that's necessarily a strong mandate.

It's a nonbinding referendum. No one really knows what's going to happen now.

At what frequency?

! Moderator Note we don't make uncited assertions like that here. Cite your source or withdraw the claim.

Photons do not interact very well. Your cross beams will do nothing.

Either. Obviously the higher and better the qualification the more employable you are likely to be.

No.

Nope. I know lots of people with physics degrees doing various things in various industries. I also know a range of people with PhDs in physics who do a range of different job.

There is a difference between being a working physicist and being an academic physicist. Whilst it's true that in academia (in all subjects) you need to publish or perish. I have several friends who only ever get one or two year postdoctoral contracts. St some point during your early career you need to start finding your own finding so writing grant applications. This is not reflected across all of research. I'm an experimental physicist, I have a permanent contract and some sway over the direction of my research. I've written a couple of grant applications in the last few years but they were for bits of research that were outside of the remit of my team so would have needed additional funding. Physicist in general are also highly employable in general due to the problem solving skills which they tend to have. It's also not terribly uncommon to change fields after your undergraduate degree or even PhD. My work isn't related to my PhD, but the skills you learn and develop are transferrable and important. I'd say for undergraduate, within reason, it's good to do a subject you enjoy and do well at it rather than do something you think will make you money and do mediocre at it.