mexicancartel

@mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Say it again, Dexter⁩ ⁨⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Barbie Ben 10?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[Thread] Mental Math⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  It would be a lot more smoother, smoother than a marble. But thoose detection of micro imperfections might be possible

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[Thread] Mental Math⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah there is a lot of neural networks, but i don’t think that is the only thing in brain. There could be calculators and integrator circuits

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IPhones' default photo format is HEIC, something that Windows doesn't open by default.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  I am talking about the prompting “on install”. Its just add on install and everything works. That sounds like out of the box support for me

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IPhones' default photo format is HEIC, something that Windows doesn't open by default.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Almost all of them? They may prompt you to install additional codecs but thats it. Most software displaying images support thoose image formats. Man we have vlc to display any format

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Jewel Beetles⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  You forgot to add soms jPeG so that edit is still visisble

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Pants⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Well they are same and switcg between thoose styles when you take transpose

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Domination⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  You just need math

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Fastest Animal⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Explain it to my friend too

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Responsible Adults⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  “Non-orientable surface” is the thing. The surface of that thing is not orientable. That means you can’t draw some normal vector to define the surface. When you traverse through the surface with a normal vector you can end up in the same point with that vector pointing the opposite direction in such a surface. That gives two directions for the same point or in other words you can’t define the surface like that with a normal vector. Its the surface and not the shape itself that is non-orientable

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Harm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Zero is not unlabelled lol

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Half as Hot⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Absolute-ly

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨smart engineering⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  No 11 is much less than 3,628,800

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I wish I was this funny..⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t know, they also charge high amount for open access right?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Eels⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I think you are using voyager

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It's the spherical chicken of legend! Somebody get the frictionless vacuum!⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  But if we neglect gravity then chicken can jump indefenitely right? Just to make things simple…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Infinite Suffering⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  They used database to store integer…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Horrors We've Unleashed⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Maybe to that entire comment

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hungry Lions⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Downloads it? Yes. Save as a file? No, atleast not permanently

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨He's just lucky I guess⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Sleep

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨He's just lucky I guess⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  It entered from the back

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨50% survival rate⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah that’s how “normal people” thinks here

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨50% survival rate⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s standard deviation

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anthropologists: "You motherfuckers!"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  We are just stardust obeying physics laws

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨stars & sharks⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  But polaris Aa is the only visible star with naked eye. So that can be called formation of star?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨yogurt⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thants.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Mobin' Time⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Möööbius sheet

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨🤢🤮🤢⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Twist: she is a corpse

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What if?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I guess the issue here is that my argument is there are similarities and your argument is that one shouldn’t point out similarities unless there are enough of them…?

  I’d say, kind of… Yeah jackfruits are like apples but yellow. And also big. And also tastes different. Also have spikes. But they are still like apples.

  Sure you can imagine it like that, and one more note, the components of the units are very different on stellar system, unlike indifferentiable subatomic particles. This means you can’t have any named atom since all of them are different. It also emmits energy from star. Still yes you could imagine it like an atom, and fit the crieterias you mentioned(which I think must include a bit more which would disqualify stellar systems from being atom, but that’s your classification).

  For another system which may fit your atomic desciption, we could also try scaling up the normal atom! That is, make electrically charged macroscopic bodies as nucleus and electrons. This I think in principle will work much better than gravitational atom. We can have repulsion as well as attraction which would be enough to balance out for stability. We would still get a planetary model(Rutherford model) of such an atom.

  Also unfortunately, there aren’t many forces in physics, so i’m afraid i can’t find more analogous systems. Anyway thank you for the curious exploration<3

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What if?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I wasnt saying it was not possible for gravitational captured system, but bringing your two atoms together and they bond is not possible(because it keeps falling into each other). It’s the (outward)momentum that keeps such a system stable. It would not have form a stable system when you keep it near without any velocity to spin around each other, it will not form a stable system–another dissimiliarity from atoms.

  Its hard to make a stable system with magnets so i said perfectly setting velocities. As you mentioned, a straight line spinning was what I imagined when writing. But i’m asking if you set it and made it work, would you count that also as some kind of atomic model?

  If you are just saying there are some similiarities with atoms, sure! But then many things has some similiarity to atomic model. Your examples sure could be regarded as such atomic bonds philosophically. I couldn’t imagine stealing proxima centauri as bonding, since its already so far away from “nucleus”. Or in your analogy it could be atom held by van der Walls force being removed… man… I gave you another point

  And I don’t know If there would be a magnetic bonding scenario but I think it might be possible with complicated calculations and perfect initial conditions. Also what about some ferromagnetic metal moving around a magnet?

  What I am trying to point out is that any-force system could be then regarded like capable of being like an atomic model with chemical-like properties.