any way to chart CPJ's twitter velocity?

BuzzCzar said:
there is no direction and there is no distance in a tweet. its a pure frequency.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, it is a frequency. But the OP wants to know the rate at which that frequency f has been changing. So we need df/dt, the frequencelocity.
 
TWEET MEISTER!

pjraverstweeter.jpg
 
gtzulu said:
Ah, yes, it is a frequency. But the OP wants to know the rate at which that frequency f has been changing. So we need df/dt, the frequencelocity.
Click to expand...

I'll be called a nerd again, but the numerator is apparently more important than anything else. If it isn't some measurement of distance then you are an idiot. Speed is simply a measurement of something over time. You don't need to make up new words to understand that the same basic principle's apply.
 
GT1992 said:
To me, distance is an amount of distance travelled in a certain direction, often only on the x-axis. An amount of twits increasing could be categorized as being the same.
Click to expand...

as you clearly state "distance traveled". operationally that means i know what distance you are from me at time 0, then i know what distance you are from me at time t. in order to calculate velocity (or even speed) i then first determine the change in your distance to me (or alternatively the distance traveled, they are the same) and then over what period of time this was done.

to be most clear, i should have initially stated "rate of change in position per unit time"

number of tweets is not a change in position, nor does it describe a distance.

let us say that you were allowed only a maximum number of tweets. would you describe the number of tweets made in comparison to the total allowed as a velocity of use? no, you would call it a percent because it is DIMENSIONLESS

similarly, things that have a pure "per unit time" DIMENSIONS are called FREQUENCIES and not VELOCITIES. it is just what the words mean

when you say "closet" do you realize that the root is the Latin word "clausum" which means "closed space". do you see how it would be dumb to think of a closet as it was defined in Latin because it would be difficult to get very many suits or sweaters into a closed space.

i think i have made my point
 
BuzzCzar said:
ve·loc·i·ty
/vəˈläsətē/
Noun
The speed of something in a given direction.
Click to expand...

My recollection is that velocity does not account for direction but only distance/time. Speed, on the other hand, accounts for the route taken so can be equal to or less than velocity depending on whether the route taken was longer than the shortest possible distance.
 
00Burdell said:
My recollection is that velocity does not account for direction but only distance/time. Speed, on the other hand, accounts for the route taken so can be equal to or less than velocity depending on whether the route taken was longer than the shortest possible distance.
Click to expand...

Backwards/wrong.

Velocity vector = derivative of position vector with respect to time

Speed = magnitude of velocity vector

Neither take into account round trip path length.
 
MtownJacket said:
Backwards/wrong.

Velocity vector = derivative of position vector with respect to time

Speed = magnitude of velocity vector

Neither take into account round trip path length.
Click to expand...

I think he or she may be thinking of "average speed" versus "average velocity". (In which case they've got their definitions backwards, as you said.)

Suppose you have two points 1 km apart, and there is a curved path between them of length 2 km. If you traverse the path in one hour, your average speed will have been 2 km/hr, but your average velocity will have been 1 km/hr (in the direction of a line segment connecting the first point to the second).
 
gtzulu said:
I think he or she may be thinking of "average speed" versus "velocity".

Suppose you have two points 1 km apart, and there is a curved path between them of length 2 km. If you traverse the path in one hour, your average speed will have been 2 km/hr, but your velocity will have been 1 km/hr (in the direction of a line segment connecting the first point to the second).
Click to expand...

You average velocity would be that, yes.
 
Velocity does not have an average, as you can not average direction. It has a resultant in some given direction. Speed only has magnitude, and is always positive, so it can be averaged in the form of total distance over total time.

In zulu's example, speed is 2km/hr (which fails for using metric).
Resultant velocity is 1 km/hr in the direction of the line segment but is 2km/hr in the circumferential direction.
 
WracerX said:
Velocity does not have an average, as you can not average direction. It has a resultant in some given direction.
Click to expand...

An average of vectors is just summing them (vector addition), then dividing them by a scalar. So of course you can have an average velocity.
 
And some people want to have a major that doesn't require calculus...
 
Well, he's lightyears ahead of where I thought he'd be. CPJ said this about Vad's progress during his first summer. Perhaps this figuative use of distance for progress could be the distance component of CPJ's twitter velocity. Just saying.
 
WracerX said:
Velocity does not have an average, as you can not average direction. It has a resultant in some given direction. Speed only has magnitude, and is always positive, so it can be averaged in the form of total distance over total time.

In zulu's example, speed is 2km/hr (which fails for using metric).
Resultant velocity is 1 km/hr in the direction of the line segment but is 2km/hr in the circumferential direction.
Click to expand...

What was your major?
 
AE. I can't think of a time when I've calculated average velocity. Or an average vector.
 
WracerX said:
AE. I can't think of a time when I've calculated average velocity. Or an average vector.
Click to expand...

every time you have calculated it based on starting point and ending point you have calculated the AVERAGE direction of travel and average speed in that direction. (because you dont care about the path)

if you have a function for s (the position) as a function of t, and then take the derivative, you have now found the FUNCTION that describes the velocity at any time t. this is the only time that you will have solved for some non-average but rather a specific time.

any end point - starting point calculation for ANYTHING is typically an average b/c it discounts path, pattern, or whatever you are dealing with

when you drive from your house to Bobby Doddy Stadium, you make stops at lights, or to give money to that guy on the corner, or to buy a Mellow Yellow at the convenience store, and you do not travel in a straight line nor at constant speed. however, you can easily average the sum of all of your travel vectors by simply subtracting the starting point from the ending point (dont forget to account for the fact that its a vector and has direction) and you arrive at a conclusion of an AVERAGE speed in an AVERAGE direction

since tweets travel over the air, over a cable and then through a server, and back out via cables and then usually also an antenna, the distance traveled by the tweet actually does exist. so, replacing the true and calculable speed of a tweet in proper terms with some bastardized version that simply means frequency is not just stupid want-to-be-cool-sounding-dumbassness but also completely mathematically and scientifically false

no wonder the smart players go to Stanford and not GT based on this thread alone. no average velocity, no direction on a vector, dont know what frequency is...

only at Tech
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top