pbbananaman

joined 1 year ago
[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But if the average is better, then we’re will clearly win by using it. I’m not following the logic of tracking the worst case scenarios as opposed to the average.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Just like all humans can do right now, right?

I never see any humans on the rode staring at their phone and driving like shit.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

To the posters commenting on how amazing it is Americans are wowed by the obvious: there’s an entire electric train network called BART throughout the land surrounding this small peninsula run of Caltrain. And it’s been running since the 60s so it’s not really new to us. It’s also noisy as shit because the wheels are dumb. But it’s still fast.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

You using a different kind of sumac than the rest of us? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumac#In_food

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It’s for a 3/4 cup serving which doesn’t seem all that unreasonable.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Paper lets the flour breathe, releasing moisture. The grain isn’t 100% when milled and the milling process generates significant heat (mill some grain at home with a motorized mill and see). Warmth + moisture + hermetically sealed plastic smells like a nice way to grow some fungus.

Edit: isn’t 100% dry when milled.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I get that people like to be stubborn about this but there are very real and intuitive reasons that decimals don’t make sense everywhere. Consider how intuitive telling time using “kiloseconds” and decimals might be.

The right tool needs to be used for the right job. I am a scientist. In the lab, metric is fantastic as it allows for precision recording and I don’t care about intuition.

It’s not a point of pride to use one system over another. For example, in America we use both systems in the right contexts. I am happily able to fluidly switch between what’s most appropriate for the situation. I get that context/code switching is generally difficult but I think it’s an overall value add.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

If you don’t fight it and accept that imperial is designed with base 12 and not base 10, everything makes more sense. Measurements across all of imperial are to be cut into 12, 6, 4, 3, or 2.

Sometime base 12 works really nicely, especially outside of a lab, when you want to be able to have as many options for division easily as possible.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

No, the analogy is more that the oscillations are themselves the particles.

The addition of energy into a system would be this hand push. The fact that the particles themselves exist means that they are oscillations in this mesh (with some energy/frequency). Interactions with other particles can add or remove energy.

Definitely these canvas metaphor are just conveniences. Also, I got it from Zee’s “Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell” which is a standard graduate or advanced undergrad level book on QFT.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Special relativity definitely overlaps with quantum mechanics and that overlap forms the basis of the math used at collider experiments like those at the LHC. Special relativity is simple with 2 rules that let you derive all the equations: 1) no universal reference frames 2) speed of light is constant.

You’re probably thinking about general relativity which defines gravity through the curvature of space time.

If you think about quantum mechanics existing on some “canvas”, that might look like an interlocking mesh of springs (like something under a bed or cot). You could take your hand and bounces it up and down on this mesh, adding oscillations and creating standing waves in the grid. These oscillations would be different particles (electrons, protons) each with their own characteristic frequency of oscillations. If you add energy to the bed of springs, you can “pop” particles into existence. All these particles actually are are just excitations of the mesh/canvas. As of yet, there’s been no way to define or find the gravity particle on this canvas, so right now the canvas of space time and the canvas of quantum mechanics are two distinct “things”.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Cheque? lol don’t give yourself away too hard comrade.

[–] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (4 children)

How long ago? ROOT (and other frameworks like GEANT) using C++ has been the standard for over 15 years, but probably longer. I think my advisor was of the last generation that had to write in Fortran.

view more: next ›