woodenghost
@woodenghost@hexbear.net
- Comment on IT'S A TRAP 2 days ago:
There are different ways to compare the “sizes” of infinite set. So you could both be right in different contexts and for different sets. But the one concept people mostly mean, when they say, that some infinities are larger than other, is one to one correspondence (also called “cardinality”):
If you have a set and you can describe how you would choose one element of a second set for each element of the first, than that’s called a one to one correspondence. In that case, people say the two sets have the same cardinality which is one way to define their size (and a very common and useful one).
For example there is a one to one correspondence between the integers and the even integers. The procedure is to just take the integers and multiple each of them by two. So these two sets have the same cardinality and in that sense, the same size.
There is even a procedures that proofs, that the set of the rational numbers has the same cardinality as the natural numbers.
But Cantor proved, that there can never be such a procedure, that established a one to one correspondence between the natural numbers and the reals. So it’s in that sense, that people say the reals form the larger set.
- Comment on IT'S A TRAP 2 days ago:
Also almost all real numbers are undefinable. (Unless you’re using a model, that makes them countable.)
So that means, if they are all different, than almost all the “humans” on the bottom track are something we can not even imagine in principle. Wouldn’t be surprised, if infinite Superman’s where among them.
- Comment on 2 OP 2 weeks ago:
Okay, wow, it was true all along. Thanks for sharing that cool video!
- Comment on 2 OP 2 weeks ago:
I tried to research that, but couldn’t find anything. I have to call bullshit.
- Comment on Hue hue hue 2 weeks ago:
It’s fine, the sun send us an heart emoji.
- Comment on It's always Brassica 2 weeks ago:
No, it’s just a joke. But lots of veggies are.
- Comment on IF YOU TAKE ENOUGH YOU CAN SEE *THE PATTERN* BRO 3 weeks ago:
That laser is way too close to his eyes. Anyway, probably just seeing the speckle pattern, which granted, can look really cool and moves with your head as you tilt it.
- Comment on The Pp 3 weeks ago:
roles can be swapped immediately
must be nice
- Comment on Let's hear it, little lemmings. 1 month ago:
Definitely not Feynman. He developed his whole public clown persona only to distract from his guilt over participating in mass murder. Curie was literally to radioactive to safely get anywhere near to. Her remains are sealed in lead. Which of the other ones had least toxic masculinity?
- Submitted 1 month ago to science_memes@mander.xyz | 3 comments
- Comment on Black Holes 1 month ago:
That was just a metaphor. An event horizon is different from the Hubble radius in several ways.
- Comment on Black Holes 1 month ago:
Actually you wouldn’t notice anything special crossing the event horizon. You’d just continue to fall.
- Comment on it's called speedrunning, my dudes 1 month ago:
Makes you wonder why only one beetle does this. Were the adaptions necessary to survive the digestive acid really complex or really unlikely, maybe?
- Comment on the dunkler 2 months ago:
I spent years never having read or heard of this fish at all, but thankfully that dark dark time in my life just ended.
- Comment on well? 2 months ago:
That’s not an empirical observation nor a new discovery though. It just an analogy that leans on the definition of Schwarzschild Radius. No one is seriously implying, that we’re somehow trapped in a black hole.
In fact, the analogy only holds, if the Hubble parameter is constant and this new result, if it holds up, would still indicate, that it is not constant. As was expected by the standard model of cosmology. If the Hubble constant is decreasing, and consensus is that it does, than the Hubble radius is also different from an event horizon in the following way: light reaching us from more than 5 billion years ago comes from regions that have always been receding from us at speeds faster than light.
- Comment on Obsession 2 months ago:
What?
- Comment on UwU brat mathematician behavior 2 months ago:
But physicists actually do that? They often write it like this: ∫ dx f(x) or this: ∫∫∫ dxdydz f(x,y,z)
- Comment on the unseen worlds 2 months ago:
Ultraviolet induced visible fluorescence photography
Sounds complicated, but it’s just shining UV light on an object in a dark room and taking a normal photo with long exposure. If you want to be pure about only picturing visible light, you might need a UV filter, since many cameras can already see a bit of UV despite inbuilt filters.
- Comment on USA 🇺🇸 USA 🇺🇸 USA 2 months ago:
Yes, fruit is a botanical category, but vegetable is not.
- Comment on we are creators 2 months ago:
Then the inherent contradictions of capitalism really started to hit, quantitative change passed to qualitative change and progress grinded to a halt and science and technology are regressing now in the imperial core.
- Comment on Cursed 2 months ago:
They proved it for n=5 and 10.
- Comment on Jigsaw Trolley Problem 3 months ago:
Yes and because C3 is a golden ball, you should confidently switch to the second door. Because now it’s just the Monty Hall problem with balls instead of goats. When the madman chose a door to opened, he deliberately chose a bad (mixed) door, otherwise he would have given away the correct location. The fact, that he opened the third instead of the second gives you new information, that you can take advantage of by switching, increasing your chances. Had the ball been silver, it might have been revealed to come from a bad door.
- Comment on MEN. 3 months ago:
And maybe the real potion was the therapy we went to along the way along the way
- Comment on Piss off! 4 months ago:
But what’s even on the y-axis? Aspect ratio? X is probably weight?
- Comment on The hills are alive with the sound of music! 🎶🎵 5 months ago:
Outside of mating season, birds definitely do sing just for fun.
And even in mating season, I wonder if birds really consciously try to “get laid” or if they just sing, because it feels like the right thing to do in the moment and then getting laid happens. I mean, some start singing very young. How would they know what it’s for the first time? Not all birds are as smart as crows.
This review paper looks at the motivation for both kinds of singing: intrinsically motivated (just for fun, all year round) and singing that attracts mates. In the latter, it’s unclear, what triggers the motivation. The author supposes, it might be a combination of socially reinforced behavior and the vicinity of a mate, rather then the act of copulation, that triggers the reward.
- Comment on Anting 5 months ago:
Without medication
💊 🐦⬛ Just flying over to the ant drug store to get some fresh HCOOH.
- Comment on He's gonna be walking for a little bit 5 months ago:
Well, he should consider himself lucky, since he’s still in one of the early rooms. In fact, almost as good as the first one, since the amount of rooms with numbers smaller than 2×TREE(3) as a percentage of all the rooms, is zero. Almost every other guest has it worse.
- Comment on Bees don't have lungs. 5 months ago:
It’s what limits their size. If insects had lungs, they could get larger. 300 million years ago, when the oxygen content in the atmosphere was temporarily higher, there were huge dragonflies with 75 cm wingspan (2.5 ft).
- Comment on Tigers 🐅 🐯 5 months ago:
9% of people with only one x-chromosome: same-picture
- Comment on logs are for quitters 5 months ago:
Wonder what that would look like the even more extreme case of matter-anti-matter?
By the way, energy density is exactly what you look for in bombs. It says nothing about energy prices per joule. It’s also great for nuclear submarines or nuclear powered aircraft carriers. So war, basically. Light from the sun has a pretty low energy density, yet powers live on earth.
