FourPacketsOfPeanuts

joined 1 year ago
[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 1 points 28 minutes ago

These are great!

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 7 points 7 hours ago

Prague if anyone is wondering

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 3 points 7 hours ago

Can't wait for the relaxing sound of 100 keyboards under exam conditions..

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 7 points 17 hours ago

Someone, somewhere is getting off to this...

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 8 points 18 hours ago

C'mon, you're smarter than that

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 5 points 18 hours ago

The dog was a decoy

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 6 points 18 hours ago

One of the first PC games I played in 92.. can't believe I'm still playing it

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 48 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

I regularly forget what year it is though...

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 9 points 20 hours ago

Tbh honest I was surprised Biden was even a consideration back in 2020, he was too old even then and it made the criticisms of Trump's age and mental health not land so well. The moment it was a close call in 2020 the plan should have been 'popular dem by any means necessary'. Not, double down on aging incumbent when they rarely do better on re-election. I can't tell it if was hubris or a complete failure of the party apparatus to believe it could come up with someone more appealing than Trump..

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 26 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (7 children)

As a Brit I'm not immersed in American politics day to day. My (unqualified) take from a million miles away went:

"Oh, Joe Biden got elected thank god"

"Oh, he's promising to only serve one term, good that's completely sensible"

"Joe's running again? What? Could they not find anyone better? This isn't going to go well at all..."

"(during that debate) Oh well, looks like Trump's going to win.."

"Hey, Kamala looks like she would have won if this had been the plan from the beginning, not a sudden fumble when Biden's brain melted beyond repair on live TV.."

Seems like - from my point of view- the main culprit was hubris on Biden's part ever attempting a second term. And the inexplicable failure of the whole party to not force him out of that self destructive choice. Other candidates besides Kamala likely could have won, just seemed like any Dem candidate would be fatally undermined by starting a late campaign.

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

I agree, but in a war you do not have the luxury of apprehending every soldier for trial. Compare: the tactics of pretty much every single country.

OIOS was not able to independently authenticate...

OIOS are being churlish since it's obviously excruciatingly embarrassing for a UN agency to have been used as cover by Hamas. Note they don't say "we saw evidence and disagree with it". They're saying "yeah, Israel showed us actual evidence that these guys are part of the attacks, we just couldn't get a second version of that evidence from anywhere else. But we'll still act on it".

But that's to be expected if what they've been shown are mobile cell tower records or images from military security cameras or even private messages these guys sent themselves.

Note UNWRA are refusing to take any action against the ten or so other accused where they felt there was no good evidence. But these nine they're saying "ok, fair enough, we'll fire them".

Doesn't that show you there's at least varying qualities of evidence in the background? And if it were easy to dismiss it as manufactured by Israel they would have done so. But for these nine they agree to take action, but just grumble about the fact that this evidence, although apparently good quality enough, was handed over via Israeli channels.

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I use Boost on android, it works well. There are quite a few to try.

 

A family member put on a game show that included Brian Blessed and I commented it 'must be old as he's been dead for a while'?

Nope. 88 and going strong.

Who else has surprised you?

 

I feel the obvious answer should be "no" but help me think this through. It came from the previous Q on blackholes and am posting here for more visibility.

So considering two blackholes rotating about each other and eventually combining. It's in this situation that we get gravitational waves which we can detect (LIGO experiments). But what happens in the closing moments when the blackholes are within each others event horizon but not yet combined (and so still rotating rapidly about each other). Do the gravitational waves abruptly stop? Or are we privy to this "information" about what's going on inside an event horizon.

Thinking more generally, if the distribution of mass inside an event horizon can affect spacetime outside of the horizon then what happens in the following situation:

imagine a gigantic blackhole, one that allows a long time between passing the horizon and being crushed. You approach the horizon in a giant spacecraft and hover at a safe distance. You release a supermassive probe to descend past the horizon. The probe is supermassive in the way a mountain is supermassive. The intention is to be able to detect it's location via perturbation in the gravity field alone. Similar to how an actual mountain causes a pendulum to hang a miniscule yet measurable distance off the vertical.

Say the probe now descends down past the horizon, at some distance off the normal. Say a quarter mile to the 'left' if you consider the direction of the blackholes gravitational pull.

Let's say you had set the probes computer to perform some experiment, and a simple "yay/nay" indicated by it either staying on its current course down (yay) or it firing it's rockets laterally so that it approaches the direct line been you and the singularity and ends up about a quarter mile 'right' (to indicate nay).

The question is, is the relative position of the mass of this probe detectable by examining the resultant gravitational force exerted on your spaceship? Had it remained just off of centre minutely to the 'left' where it started to indicate the probe communicating 'yay' to you, or has it now deflected minutely to the right indicating 'nay'?

Whether the answer to this is yes or no, I'm confused what would happen in real life?

If the probes relative location is not detectable via gravity once it crosses the horizon, what happens as it approaches? Your very sensitive gravity equipment originally had a slight deviation to the left when both you and probe were outside the horizon. Does it abruptly disappear when it crosses the horizon? If so where does it go? The mass of the probe will eventually join with the mass of the singularity to make the blackhole slightly more massive. But does the gravitational pull of its mass instantly change from the location in the horizon where it crossed (about a quarter mile to the 'left') to now being at the singularity directly below. Anything "instant" doesn't seem right.

Or.. it's relative position within the horizon is detectable based on you examining the very slight deviations of your super sensitive pendulum equipment on board your space craft. And you're able to track it's relative position as it descends, until it's minute contribution to gravity has coalesced with the main blackhole.

But if this is the case then aren't we now getting information from within the horizon? Couldn't you set your probe to do experiments and then pass information back to you by it performing some rudimentary dance of manoeuvres? Which also seems crazy?

So both options seem crazy? Which is it?

(Note, this is a thought experiment. The probe is supermassive using some sort of future tech that's imaginable but far from possible by today's standards. Think a small planet with fusion powered engines or whatever. The point is, in principle, mass is detectable, and mass is moveable. Is this a way to peek inside a blackhole??)

 

Modulation / key changes have been used in music for ages but the style I'm talking about is the distinctive last verse (or chorus) sudden key change up to power through to the end. Seems to have come about sometime in the 60s/70s and was everywhere in the 80s onwards.

Examples:

Heaven is a place on earth - Belinda Carlisle

I will always love you - Whitney Houston

But who popularised it? What was the first big song to do it and set the style for the genre?

 

I seem to be completely failing to work out how to do this? See the reply in your inbox in the context of the original conversation?

view more: next ›