Jump to content

Today I Learned


Arkhi

Recommended Posts

TIL the songs "Be Prepared" from the Lion King and "In the Dark of the Night" from Anastasia were not sang by their original voice actors, but instead a very talented guy who is purposely casted to impersonate and sing for other people. You can tell when you listen to both songs side by side. He takes over after the first few verses, and the dood is so good at it, that it is absolutely unnoticable. :o

Rewatching the videos makes it even more impressive, cause the OG VAs and the Impersonator singing their parts is so damn good at it. It's so Subtle.

Also, warning for people who haven't seen the new Avenger's movie yet... don't click the following spoiler.

TIL...

In the scene where all the characters are drinking and trying to lift Thor's Hammer, Captain America tries to lift it and makes it budge... that was a subtle joke towards the fact that in the actual Comics Captain America does eventually become worthy enough to wield Thor's hammer and occasionally does. Which I knew... however... what I learned to day due to the mysterious wonder that is the internet. That Cap isn't the only Avenger featured in the movie who canonicly weilds it...

In the Scene they ask Black Widow if she wants to give it a shot and she flat out refuses... fun fact... she is fully capable of picking it up... and it was just a subtle nod to the comic's Canon that most people would have missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TIL barbecues without meat are quite mediocre.

Yeah, metal doesn't taste good on its own. Slap some BBQ sauce on it.

TIL (from some study I cannot find the link to) one's happiness has little to no basis on their physical appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 TILs

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Today I learned, Change Pokemon does NOT work well when you change a pokemon to a different pokemon. I turned Patrat into Yvetal it hits level 10 doesn't learn Air Slash. Did the same thing witth anoher pokemon and turned it intto MewTwo didn't learned a single move as well......GAH! Why can't things ever go so well!?!?!?!??!? T_T

Today I learned that tomorrow is Mother's Day and Pizza is on the menu for only tomorrow.

Today I learned that I now have a hatred for not only Fern on Reborn bu Ren on Rejuvenation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TIL that, when following the Slater(-Condon) rules, when calculating the energy's of the wavefunction of an atom/molecule, in using full CI expansion, the energy in the coverage between the single excited Slater Determinant and a higher excited Slater determinant (given as <phi(a,b;r,s) | H | phi(a;r)>) doesn't equal 0, because of some serious shenanigans. See below.
To understand this, it has to be noted that normally orbitals are orthonormal to each other, making normally the coverage between two spinorbitals is given by epsilon * KroneckerDelta(a,r). (KroneckerDelta means: if a=r, KD = 1; else KD = 0) Epsilon is the own value of the operator H (which is the Hamiltonian, of which the own values are the energy of a system Fock operator.

Ladies and gentlemen: Quantum Chemistry. Wish me luck for the coming finals.

EDIT: oopsie-daisy, made quite some errors there.
The <..|..|..> thingie calculates to an integral containing spinorbitals and some sort of Fock Operator. when one of the SD's is the SD resembling the unexcited wavefunction, a.k.a. the one calculated through the Hartree-Fock-method, and the other a single-excited SD(electron from orbital a to r), the equation ends up to be <fi(a)|F|fi®>.

Because spinorbitals fi(a),...,fi®,... are own functions of the Fock Operator F, under that operator the fi's are orthonormal, making the equation equal to epsilon * KD(a,r), which in that case is 0 (because a is not r)
However, when you pick a singly-excited SD and a doubly-exicted SD: phi(a,d;r,s) (just read: none of them is the Hartree-Fock SD, and the difference in excitement is 1), the equation ends up in <fi(a)|F'|fi®>. F' is a Fock operator, similar, but not the same as F. Due to this, the spinorbitals aren't own functions anymore, which makes them under F' non-orthogonal, which causes coverage, hence it's not 0.

Apologies for the glaring error. I should study some more (that's punishment enough)

Edited by laggless01
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...