LGTM

joined 4 days ago
[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 9 hours ago

What is stable? I just run nix flake update then brew a coffee to accompany me for the next 12 hours

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

C for [ˌt͡ʃɛ.kʰɪ.sl̥oʊ̯.ˈvɑ.kʰi.ə] (Yes I did narrow transcription for the purpose of making it look worse 💀)

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 21 hours ago

I think the point of big data is to collect enough information to extrapolate other qualities about whatever you want to know, so if everyone is on the list then you have no patterns to go off of besides "on Earth" or "in X country".

Side comment: if 99% of people were on the list, the the govt could just oppress everyone with a 99% accuracy rate. It's entirely possibly they could pick a proportion drastically lower than 99%

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 21 hours ago

I think it's kind of funny that they mention to allow the flat earth comments when just previously saying that they want to prevent cult-like behavior; flat-eathers won't listen despite the evidence. Then again, verifiability doesn't seem to be holding strong these days

 

And fuck I got trapped! Enjoy a picture of chad Kim Dokja from ORV drawn by the artist of Nano Machine :)

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago

I have quite literally dreamed about running neo/fastfetch 😭

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago

I quite literally did this yesterday, but it's OK, my roommates already did before me :)

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago

You know, this ain't so bad

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago

I seriously thought I was reading Spanish at first

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago

I wonder if such a situation could occur if we were in some huge medium where Cherenkov radiation could occur

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 days ago

Hmmmm, I guess that the premise was probably wrong then, since the object necessarily has to have mass and travel slower than c (I mean, a massless object would be constrained the by c anyways). The gravitational lensing is a good addition! I have no idea how I forgot, but I remember a hs physics class where this came up for new telescope images

 

If we look into a far off distance at an object travelling towards Earth, shouldn't we be able to see both the light from the object at some time t plus the light at some later time (t + delta t)?

Let's also assume that the object is traveling fast enough that it is discernable. This point might be moot, since I'm not sure if such a situation is possible. I know that Rayleigh's criterion could give us a lower bound for how far the images of the object has to be, though I'm not sure how complicated it would be to throw redshift into the mix.

This seems like one of those "Whoa this feels see weird causally but it's just a natural consequence of things we've observed thus has little repercussions as to what limitations physicists actually work around." Actually, I could see perhaps long exposure photos (or the telescope equivalent, if it exists) could run into issues.

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 days ago

I always just used my left hand with the thumb and pinky as the y and x axes respectively, then the in-between fingers just help me visualize which "point" is higher (we only have two options to choose from if they're not equal anyways)

[–] LGTM@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 days ago

Absolutely agree, lowk a programmer must've done it else I don't think I've met a mathmematician (or maybe, not crazy enough ones) that ever preferred redefining variables (esp in pedagogical material!!!!)

view more: next ›