The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.

A Billion Degrees of [Science]

12357101

Posts

  • Irredeemably IndecisiveIrredeemably Indecisive WisconsinRegistered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Brolo wrote: »

    They said the same exact thing about OxyContin.

    I don't think I will ever be able to trust the medical community regarding any claim of an opioid that isn't addictive.

    Irredeemably Indecisive on
  • QuetziQuetzi Here we may reign secure, and in my choice, To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User, Moderator mod
    Even if it's not true, it's still potentially a very good thing

    Having a wide diversity of pain relief medications can help with addiction issues, and options are always a good thing with medication

  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    "Non-addictive" means not physically addictive. Anything that removes pain can still cause psychological dependence.

  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    I had an idea for a science fiction story that I'm surprised I haven't seen before (not that it doesn't exist, I just haven't used any examples I can think of) but my brother seemed to think it wasn't really feasible (not that it necessarily disqualifies it for Sci-Fi)

    I say this here because I'm curious if his reasoning is right. I have no reason to doubt it particularly I'm just wondering about it. Basically the idea is that if FTL is possible you could theoretically go far enough away that, with accurate enough telescopes and the like, you could actually watch history happen hundreds of years ago as light bouncing off Earth reached the point you established a base or w/e using FTL. My brother said this wouldn't really work except for really broad things because the light particles would be too spread out to get anything like an accurate picture. That seemed reasonable but I don't know enough about light and light-dispersal in space to know for sure. Is he basically right? Would a story along those lines basically have to hand-wave away that issue?

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • Duke 2.0Duke 2.0 Time Trash Cat Registered User regular
    anything with FTL travel will require a bit of hand-waving because our model of understanding the universe is just now coming to terms with potentially cheating lightspeed

    VRXwDW7.png
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    Duke 2.0 wrote: »
    anything with FTL travel will require a bit of hand-waving because our model of understanding the universe is just now coming to terms with potentially cheating lightspeed

    Well yes, but hand-waving FTL is sort of its own thing though if I wrote a story like that and I just hand-waived/bullshitted how it was possible that would be fine, doesn't necessarily have to be super hard Sci-Fi, I'm just wondering if that's how it would work as far as science is concerned in real life and his argument was accurate.

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • WeaverWeaver Breakfast Witch Hashus BrowniusRegistered User regular
    You can't see human sized details at stellar distances. Even satellite surveillance isn't as detailed as movies indicate.

  • JedocJedoc In the scuppers with the staggers and jagsRegistered User regular
    We can currently make telescopes that come very close to giving us the highest resolution possible for their size. We are actually running up against the physical constraints of what light can tell us before things go all quantum and fuzzy. The only way we currently know of to get better telescopes is to build bigger mirrors. According to this article, spotting something the size of a blue whale on the surface of the nearest known exoplanet would require a telescope the diameter of the sun. And as a time machine, this would only buy you about four years of history. Even assuming an FTL drive, using a telescope to try and study the Civil War is pretty impractical based on what we currently know about light and optics, and there's not much on the horizon that seems likely to remedy that.

    Arthur C. Clarke came up with an idea that might help: if you could create and maintain a wormhole large enough to act as a lens, you could use it to instantaneously observe faraway objects. In your case, if you could instantly travel 50 light years away and generate a wormhole 50 light years long, you could use it to observe the Earth as it was in 1966.

    Of course, in certain mathematical models of wormholes, you wouldn't even have to travel 50 light years away. A wormhole that sees the present 50 light years away and one that sees the room you're in 50 years ago are pretty much indistinguishable mathematically. Stephen Baxter took this idea and created a really neat story in The Light of Other Days.

    GDdCWMm.jpg
  • LabelLabel Registered User regular
    I would think feasibility would have a lot to do with the capability of your optical sensors.

    The information itself, I can't say whether that would still exist or not. In concept, I feel like it could? but probably so muddy with other things like intervening dust that recieving and interpreting it might be effectively impossible?

    just guessing from ignorance though, really.

  • Duke 2.0Duke 2.0 Time Trash Cat Registered User regular
    when I say handwave FTL, it's more the residual effects rather than the direct mechanism

    so the question of 'what if I traveled FTL far enough to observe light from the past and study it?' is answered with 'you can't beat the speed of the light to start seeing the past'

    (also say your telescopes are looking at quantum light, quantum solved everything)

    VRXwDW7.png
  • BucketmanBucketman Call me SkraggRegistered User regular
    Hmm theres a video going around on my FB of a lady testing a bunch of different water brands with a ph tester and talking about how the ones that pop up around a 7 or 8 are bad garbage water you shouldn't drink. And all the ones that show basic (blue) are alkaline and the best for you.

    Isn't water suppose to have a 7 ph? I recall that a 7 is somewhat neutral and what your water should be.

  • SiliconStewSiliconStew Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Bucketman wrote: »
    Hmm theres a video going around on my FB of a lady testing a bunch of different water brands with a ph tester and talking about how the ones that pop up around a 7 or 8 are bad garbage water you shouldn't drink. And all the ones that show basic (blue) are alkaline and the best for you.

    Isn't water suppose to have a 7 ph? I recall that a 7 is somewhat neutral and what your water should be.

    Pure water pH is 7. Drinking water is typically anywhere from 6 to 8.5. But pH level gets more sensitive the more pure the water is. A really pure reverse osmosis filtered glass of water will become acidic somewhere around 6 just from absorbing CO2 in the air. Put just a single speck of baking soda in and itll go over 7. But a glass of mineral water will take a lot more contaminants to change pH. "Alkali water" benefits are homeopathic BS.

    SiliconStew on
    Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    Alkaline water is just a new health fad.
    Remember how everyone was up in arms about gluten because people believed that everyone gaining weight, diabetes, or any number of health issues was because of low-grade Celiac disease?
    Alkaline water is that with "Acidosis", which where the PH level of the blood is out of balance. People are claiming that a normal diet gives you low-grade acidosis causing everything from cancer to diabetes, and that alkaline water will cure that.

  • BroloBrolo Broseidon Lord of the BroceanRegistered User regular
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    Alkaline water is just a new health fad.
    Remember how everyone was up in arms about gluten because people believed that everyone gaining weight, diabetes, or any number of health issues was because of low-grade Celiac disease?
    Alkaline water is that with "Acidosis", which where the PH level of the blood is out of balance. People are claiming that a normal diet gives you low-grade acidosis causing everything from cancer to diabetes, and that alkaline water will cure that.

    pfft why stop with alkaline water

    U8L7NxY.jpg

    i've been chugging these babies

    get that alkaline straight from the source

  • BucketmanBucketman Call me SkraggRegistered User regular
    Why only bother with a single alkaline?

    asl_large.jpg?1382902549

  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    Worth noting that part of treating acidosis is just drinking regular water.

  • TheStigTheStig Registered User regular
    Bucketman wrote: »
    Why only bother with a single alkaline?

    asl_large.jpg?1382902549

    it must be a pain in the ass to get that shirt on over that cast

    bnet: TheStig#1787 Steam: TheStig
  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    Jedoc wrote: »

    this article is awesome thanks for posting it

    BahamutZERO.gif
  • TofystedethTofystedeth Registered User regular
    I had an idea for a science fiction story that I'm surprised I haven't seen before (not that it doesn't exist, I just haven't used any examples I can think of) but my brother seemed to think it wasn't really feasible (not that it necessarily disqualifies it for Sci-Fi)

    I say this here because I'm curious if his reasoning is right. I have no reason to doubt it particularly I'm just wondering about it. Basically the idea is that if FTL is possible you could theoretically go far enough away that, with accurate enough telescopes and the like, you could actually watch history happen hundreds of years ago as light bouncing off Earth reached the point you established a base or w/e using FTL. My brother said this wouldn't really work except for really broad things because the light particles would be too spread out to get anything like an accurate picture. That seemed reasonable but I don't know enough about light and light-dispersal in space to know for sure. Is he basically right? Would a story along those lines basically have to hand-wave away that issue?

    They actually did something similar towards the end of Battlefield Earth.

    steam_sig.png
  • Munkus BeaverMunkus Beaver You don't have to attend every argument you are invited to. Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    Alkaline water is just a new health fad.
    Remember how everyone was up in arms about gluten because people believed that everyone gaining weight, diabetes, or any number of health issues was because of low-grade Celiac disease?
    Alkaline water is that with "Acidosis", which where the PH level of the blood is out of balance. People are claiming that a normal diet gives you low-grade acidosis causing everything from cancer to diabetes, and that alkaline water will cure that.

    Aka the most annoying time to have any kind of GI disorder? Yes.

    Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
  • SnowbearSnowbear Registered User regular
    Sweet Christ

    8EVmPzM.jpg
  • Mr_RoseMr_Rose 83 Blue Ridge Protects the Holy Registered User regular
    Even if he hadn't already proved himself a colossal tool, that avatar would make me want to punch him. Yikes.

    ...because dragons are AWESOME! That's why.
    Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
    DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    He's an idiot, but now he's being abused to the point where he's deleted his account and people in that thread are going through his Facebook to find embarrassing stuff. Just take his name off the post.

    Patronising an astronaut is douchey. Suborning the abuse of another human being is worse. It's exactly the kind of shit hooble gart does, and they even use the same language. "oh he deleted his account what a coward" yep there it is.

  • cB557cB557 voOOP Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    hooble gart
    What?

  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Consider phrasing your question as something other than an order.

  • cB557cB557 voOOP Registered User regular
    Now I'm just more confused.

  • BaidolBaidol I will hold him off Escape while you canRegistered User regular
    Tube is referring to a group of silly geese. Not saying the name came about because some people were Google searching the name specifically to talk on forums where it was mentioned to post in support of it.

    The second part was, I assume, because he took your "What?" in the tone of something akin to a whiny teenager talking back to their parents. Not how I read it, but there you go.

    Steam Overwatch: Baidol#1957
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Baidol wrote: »
    Tube is referring to a group of silly geese. Not saying the name came about because some people were Google searching the name specifically to talk on forums where it was mentioned to post in support of it.

    This is actually the second iteration of the "n-word coming up on google" rumour. I just do it because I think it's funny to gently make fun of them, although the fact that their grognards can't search for it here is a plus.
    The second part was, I assume, because he took your "What?" in the tone of something akin to a whiny teenager talking back to their parents. Not how I read it, but there you go.

    It's a pretty rude way to speak to someone!

  • cB557cB557 voOOP Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    It's a pretty rude way to speak to someone!
    No, I was just honestly confused as to what you were referring to and was asking what you meant.

  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Sure! Try "I'm not sure what this means?" for example

  • cB557cB557 voOOP Registered User regular
    "What?" is faster, and this is the only time I've had someone misinterpret it this way.

  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    I also read it the benign way, like Baidol did, and was confused by tube's response

    BahamutZERO on
    BahamutZERO.gif
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    I didn't misinterpret anything. I knew exactly what you meant, and told you it was rude. You can do what you want with that information. Most people learn that simply barking "what" at someone is rude before they leave grade school, but they're undoubtedly not as pushed for time as you apparently are.

  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    I didn't misinterpret anything. I knew exactly what you meant, and told you it was rude. You can do what you want with that information. Most people learn that simply barking "what" at someone is rude before they leave grade school, but they're undoubtedly not as pushed for time as you apparently are.

    This does not seem to mesh with any social or professional interaction I've ever had. Usually just saying "what?" is taken as "please explain" and not seen as particularly rude. Only time I've seen someone get upset at someone saying "what?" was the military where saying that is sometimes taken as the person asking questioning a command. I've never seen someone take saying "what?" itself as a command or jump on someone like this for saying it.

  • ThroThro pgroome@penny-arcade.com Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    I didn't misinterpret anything. I knew exactly what you meant, and told you it was rude. You can do what you want with that information. Most people learn that simply barking "what" at someone is rude before they leave grade school, but they're undoubtedly not as pushed for time as you apparently are.

    I guess you could interpret "What?" in that way, but it seems a bit of a stretch. However, being snarky and condescending to someone is pretty fuckin rude.

  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    maybe he's cranky from his overnight layover in chicago or something?

    BahamutZERO.gif
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    maybe he's cranky from his overnight layover in chicago or something?

    Undoubtedly! I still don't like being spoken to like that, but it's not a hill I need to defend unto death.

  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Thro wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    I didn't misinterpret anything. I knew exactly what you meant, and told you it was rude. You can do what you want with that information. Most people learn that simply barking "what" at someone is rude before they leave grade school, but they're undoubtedly not as pushed for time as you apparently are.

    I guess you could interpret "What?" in that way, but it seems a bit of a stretch. However, being snarky and condescending to someone is pretty fuckin rude.

    What's certainly true is that you don't show your disdain for a practise (rudeness) by indulging in it yourself, so you do me a service by reminding me of that. Thank you.

  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    What what in the butt

This discussion has been closed.