Porqué no los dos?
But frfr I can’t imagine not having both. I’ve got enough power on my desktop to run modern games, do graphical rendering, run IDEs, and fuck around online pretty much simultaneously. Then I have a ThinkPad T14 for leaving the house to pretend I’m touching grass while actually just doing more developer shit.
Also eastern US. This past Saturday was a what-should-be-nice 79F with a “real feel” reading of 103F. Absolutely insane.
I’m lucky to have ultra-effective AC window units, though I’ve been avoiding looking at my electric statements since summer started because… yikes…
I hope you get your AC back soon. As you mentioned, the humidity is a real killer right now.
Fiberglass insulation.
Everyone knows that you don’t want asbestos getting into your lungs, but there seems to be a prominent disregard for basic safety in preventing inhilation of fiberglass for people who work with the stuff because it’s “better” than asbestos.
Generally you don’t want to be breathing in any kinds of particulate, but fiberglass is literally fibers made of glass. You are breathing in shards of glass.
Please correct me if I’m wrong because I am by now means a car repair afficionado, but isn’t disposing of oil supposed to be the problematic part of the oil change? At least from what I heard, getting rid of it in a legal/safe manner is difficult for individuals doing their own oil changes.
Touch typing is an absolute must, and I can’t imagine how anybody uses a keyboard without it. Though it is fun to see people’s reactions as you stare them in the face to hold a conversation while never breaking your keystrokes.
Recently I got a CharaChorder though, so I have to completely relearn typing. I definitely forgot how hard it can be at first.
ITT people throwing out names of things with 0 mention of what they are or what they’re used for.
Like, I appreciate being to look at everyone’s recommendations, but man that’s a lot of googling
They hate to admit it, and it’s definitely less in-your-face most of the time because of the expected formality of the scientific community, but physicists, and specifically those trying to make advancements like we see around black holes, are SUPER arrogant. For the first 2 scenarios listed, they usually only make a formal paper out of the discovery to later defend the drawback as something they can “work around”. Either by “oh we’ll definitely eventually figure out how to emperically verify this haha. Look how well it works, you’d be crazy not to believe in this”, or the more extreme “This obviously constitutes a whole rewrite of our understanding of physics because my solution is so elegant except for the parts where it literally doesn’t work”
That last one is less prone to arrogance because topology is working with an insane amount of unverifiable possibilities already, so they don’t really tend to get too attached to any given solution.
You know, I had Mozzerella that tasted strongly of soap before. I looked it up and apparently some chesses can start to do that after some variable amount of time due to some sort of chemical process. It would be worth checking if that cheese was supposed to taste like soap, or if it was going through the same issue I experienced.
If you’re wondering, yes I still ate it, like hell am I going to waste mozz that I paid for
I like the not-so-subtle implication that your little brother is lesser to a dog.
This wouldn’t work if it’s different people each time. That kind of deterrent requires the solicitor to already try once, but OP makes it sound like a rotating door of people
This is the only real, good answer I’ve seen so far.
Don’t have a lawn? Doesn’t matter, install one on your stoop exclusively for solicotors.
Live in an apartnemnt building? Instead of a sprinkler, comission someone to shamble together a remote controlled squirt gun. Bonus points if it’s on an aimable mount.
If you want to go an extra mile, somehow add vinegar into the mix. The possibilities are endless.
I think the only reason those specifically are most well known, is because they capture popular imagination.
Basically, because it’s impossible to see inside black holes to know what’s going on, there’s very few ways to validate ideas. Therefore, outside of a select number of external observational techniques (like radio signals and gravitational waves) to place some limitations, ideas about what happens beyons the event horizon are in the realm of pure math, which people don’t care about unless it either A. Verifiable, or B. Just sounds really cool.
Black Hole hypotheses therefore tend to go one of a few ways:
Scenario 1
Scientist A: Hey if you use this math, black holes can do this thing
Scientist B: That requires this other thing which isn’t true, to be true, and/or breaks this fundamental law
Scientist A: This hypothesis is my precious brain baby and if you talk shit about it I will shatter your knees
Scenario 2
Scientist A: Hey if you use this math, black holes can do this thing
Scientist B: That requires an assumption we can’t, or have yet to, verify is true (almost always somehow related to string theory)
Scientist A: This hypothesis is my precious brain baby and if you talk shit about it I will shatter your knees
Scenario 3:
Scientist A: Hey if you use this math, black holes can do this thing
Scientist B: Okay the math checks out as one of X number of possibilities with that same math, but there’s know way to tell which, if any of these would be true (equations with multiple valid solutions, almost always related to spacetime topology)
Scientist A: Heehee numbers do funni
ETA: The specific subcategories of hypotheses you mentioned also have an inherent advantage of not having to deal with singularities. Why that’s good: Einstein’s theories say infinite density impossible. With singularity, can’t connect quantum theory to relativity theory. No quantum gravity make math bb’s big sad. Solution? Instead of squoosh matter really tiny, just send it somewhere else! They aren’t the only frameworks that avoid singularities, but definitely the coolest sounding and least complicated
I can’t remember if it was a youtube video or a paper or an article or what, but I saw something explaining that, based on one interpretation of Einsteins equations, past the point of singularity, space and time invert. This would mean that the longer the black hole exists around in “our” universe (in absolute terms), the larger it becomes on the inside, and the larger it gets on the outside, the longer the inside universe would persist. I feel like you would have liked it, if only I could remember what it was. :(
The thing I saw postulated both that the universe would reuse the matter the black hole absorbed, and that there would be infinite branching universes since each would develop their own black holes, but then you have an issue with regards to running out of matter at some point. Though I guess that could be solved if you assume every black hole must converge at the end of their containing universe’s lifespan, and all matter would be reused in whatever blackhole absorbs the blackhole containing that parent universe? Oh hey, we’re back to fractals again!
Personally I’m a fan of the idea of black holes as topological stars that fall in line with string theory, but there have been so many hypothetical frameworks coming out in recent years that are just fascinating to think about.
I also choose that guy’s waifu body pillow (obviously women aren’t real)
I get the objective need for the /s in this particular context, but we absolutely should add “using /s when the sarcasm should be obvious for anyone with basic reading comprehension skills” to the list
Is this the breakthrough in nuclear fusion I’ve been hearing about