egg changed the topic of #principia to: Logs: https://esper.irclog.whitequark.org/principia | <scott_manley> anyone that doubts the wisdom of retrograde bop needs to get the hell out | https://xkcd.com/323/ | <egg> calculating the influence of lamont on Pluto is a bit silly…
<queqiao-_>
⟨vevladdd⟩ They arent funny!!!!!!!!
<queqiao-_>
⟨theeo⟩ moon runes
<raptop>
You heard it here, the official language of the Moon is Russian
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ tolerance should be Допуск, not Погрешность, right+
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ tolerance should be Допуск, not Погрешность, right? (edited)
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ Допуск is about parts that must be made very precisely. It is the maximum allowed deviation from the part's dimensions, etc. If the deviation exceeds допуск then the part is defective.
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ Погрешность is about forecasts, formulas and such. It's how much the forecast or formula deviates from reality, so it means "error".
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ Maybe use "точность" - "precision"?
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ This is the meaning in English: it is the allowed error, not the error.
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ > Симметричная матрица A. Допуск ε на норму внедиагональных элементо
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ yes, i just don't understand what is this допуск (and can't hope to understand...)
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ this is in a chapter about numerical methods for linear algebra, we are doing things to a matrix numerically, this is the maximum allowed error
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ Если err <= tol, т. е. погрешность меньше или равна заданной допустимой погрешности, то решение в точке xi+1 считается найденным, а шаг интегрирования — выполненным успешно.
<queqiao-_>
⟨Stonesmile⟩ @Transparent_Elemental Might know how some of the mathematical terms are used, I think he currently studies math that is similar in vocabulary
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ (this is exactly the stuff that Principia does here, it is a tolerance for a variable-step integrator)
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ "Заданная допустимая погрешность" - means tolerance, but is very long
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ actually you don't need "Заданная", just "Допустимая погрешность" - allowed error.
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ What I mean is that допуск appears to be a technical term in numerical analysis, not just in machining
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ This is numerical analysis
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ It looks like all three are used: допуск, погрешность/допустимая погрешность, точность/необходимая точность. Not sure what is better.
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ For brevity, Допуск, because this has to fit in a UI, not a textbook :-p
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ (погрешность or точность alone would be incorrect, this is really a requirement—or at least target—rather than an actual error/precision)
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ Yes, I see
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ ?
egg|cell|egg has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
egg|cell|egg has joined #principia
egg|cell|egg has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
egg|cell|egg has joined #principia
UmbralRaptop has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
egg|cell|egg has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
egg|cell|egg has joined #principia
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ I am confused by Отображаемая система координат for plotting frame
<bees>
displayed
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ yeah precisely
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ it seems this is saying « the reference frame which is being displayed » ?
<bees>
yes
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ that is wrong, the meaning is « the reference frame which is used to draw things », it is not the reference frame itself which is drawn
<bees>
i'd say this is impossible to misunderstand based on context
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ yes, but is it worded well
<bees>
could you link a screenshot with its usage? english is fine
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ i.e. would something like системы координат whatever.GEN (maybe чертежа?) work better
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ it is probably the most prominent feature of Principia, so I’m not entirely sure what to make of that :-p
<bees>
does plotting frame refers to what is being displayed as dashed line on main screen?
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ It refers to the reference frame used to produce that line (indeed all the lines).
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ the frame is not what is being displayed, that makes no sense.
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ the reference frame defines what is moving and what isn’t, and thus what the trajectory (which is what is drawn) looks like : things that are immobile in that reference frame are points, things that move in straight lines in that reference are straight lines, etc.
<bees>
this is exactly the same difference that you are confused with with that translation
<bees>
referring X for a picture produced with X as displaying X is understandable
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ (for instance, in ECI, Earth orbits look like ellipses ; in HCI they would look like a crushed spring of sorts)
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ I would see that as incorrect in English
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ the reference frame is not displayed
<bees>
okay, if "all the lines" are being displayed with plotting frame, then what changes on screen with changing maneuver frame?
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ displayed scale is an interesting comparison, but one displays things at some scale, whereas one displays things in some reference frame; I think the different prepositions here make this transformation less proper
<queqiao-_>
⟨Al2Me6⟩ Hm so the difference is “frame _used for_ plotting” vs “frame _being_ plotted”
<queqiao-_>
⟨Al2Me6⟩ Where the former is what you want
<bees>
those are the same
<bees>
no?
<bees>
if your plot requires a frame, then it always has a frame
<queqiao-_>
⟨Al2Me6⟩ The former suggests to me that the frame is a more abstract concept than the lines you see
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ so, for plotting, I would just say one is nonsense; for *display*, I would say that this gets actively misleading; you have things that display a reference frame because they are UI where you pick a reference frame, so *displayed frame* sounds like that
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ Welcome to #linguistics
<bees>
okay, _what_ is being displayed with which frame on that screenshot?
<bees>
1) dashed trajectory line 2) solid trajectory line 3) yellow line (planet orbit?)
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ all of the above
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ in the plotting frame
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ the reference frame of all plots
<bees>
so if i choose different maneuver frame there, nothing on the screen would change?
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ the tiny trihedron that marks the manœuvre would change its orientation
<bees>
then "displayed coordinate system" is 100% correct and significantly less confusing than english version
<bees>
imho
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ (because the manœuvre frame defines the reference frame wherein the Frenet frame defines the three burn axes)
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ so, at least in English, I would say that *displayed coordinate system* is somewhere between wrong and confusing: we have two coordinate systems whose names are displayed here (and we could in the future have the navball, which is also a display, showing a third for the attitude control law).
<bees>
in that future case something like "main screen coordinate system, maneuver coordinate system, navball coordinate system" could be used
<bees>
as it stands currently, overwhelming majority of the screen is governed by one coordinate system, and the only tiny exception is implicitely stated
<bees>
and "with usage of" is implicit
UmbralRaptop has joined #principia
<bees>
althrough i would rate it 4/5 still, it is not the "fits exactly" translation, but it is good, and i dont know if it is possible to do better
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ Well, “majority of the screen” is a messy concept, you are not always in map view. I'd like something that is unambiguous with display in a more general sense and specific to the noodles, which is the goal with*plotting*.
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ Well, “majority of the screen” is a messy concept, you are not always in map view. I'd like something that is unambiguous with display in a more general sense and specific to the noodles, which is the goal with *plotting*. (edited)
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ @von Kerman what do you think of системы координат чертежа
<queqiao-_>
⟨Transparent_Elemental⟩ the last word refers to blueprint 🤔
<queqiao-_>
⟨Transparent_Elemental⟩ or drawing, draft
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ My intent was drawing (I use dessin in French), we draw the trajectories
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ The word чертеж is not used very often and usually means something like this:
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ I'm afraid we are again in the machining or architecture territory here.
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ I agree that "отображаемая система координат" - literally "displayed reference frame" - is technically incorrect, the reference frame itself is not being displayed, rather it is used to display things.
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ I agree that "отображаемая система координат" - literally "displayed reference frame" - is technically incorrect, the reference frame itself is not being displayed, rather it is used to display things. But it's understandable. (edited)
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ Maybe "Система координат карты" (Reference frame of the map) can work? It does not contain an error (I hope), it refers to the map, where the trajectories are drawn, and it makes a clear distinction between "map reference frame" and "maneuver reference frame".
<queqiao-_>
⟨von Kerman⟩ Maybe "Система координат карты" (Reference frame of the map) can work? This term does not contain an error (I hope), it refers to the map, where the trajectories are drawn, and it makes a clear distinction between "map reference frame" and "maneuver reference frame". (edited)
<queqiao-_>
⟨egg⟩ That could work
egg|cell|egg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]