https://m.imdb.com/video/vi4151097625/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk

[removed]

I just refreshed the countdown bro

I think everyone would stop having conflicts if they knew it would lead to world peace, but they know that preventing one conflict won't stop all of them, so they continue to have them. It's like helping the environment. If one person was in charge of all pollution's and you told them that if they were to stop, then global warming would end, they would stop. But let's be real, one more person recycling their water bottles, isn't going to save the world, hence why it isn't such a big thing.

[removed]

I think all shows are different. Sons of Anarchy and Breaking Bad did a good job of keeping each season self contained in case it had to end right there. Shows like Monk and How I Met Your Mother are very episodic but do have an overarching plot they can just back to anytime they want. It didn't really matter if those shows ran 1 season or 8, they could finish they way they always wanted at any time. Game of Thrones, from the very beginning, was a show that planned for 7 seasons and it wouldn't been weird to end after 2. Simpsons, Seinfeld, and Always Sunny has absolutely no overarching plot and episodes can run indefinitely out of order.

Frankly, I think the Breaking Bad model of one season at a time is best. There is no reason to set up season 4 plot points in season 2

[removed]

One you hit 100 episodes, around 5 seasons for most network programs, your show can be syndicated. Often times that's around when there is a change up in contracts and creative teams. The show isnt jusy running on a regular primetime slot anymore, but can be run daily on fringe channels. Sometimes this goes smoothly, other times not so much.

my VERY limited understanding of temperature is that its about how fast the neutrons or some scientific tiny thing is moving. higher movement speed = higher temp = higher number

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tfckc9/eli5_why_is_there_no_cure_for_herpes_what_is_the/

[removed]

Hotter objects have more “heat”. Temperature, contrary to what’s commonly told, is not a measure of the heat or kinetic energy of a system

[deleted]

But that’s the mistake most people make. Temperature, as ridiculous as it sounds, is not a measure of heat. The temperature of a system is a property, like pressure or weight, which in the way it’s defined, has a value proportional to the internal energy(what’s commonly referred to as “heat”) of that object. It’s meaning is completely independent of heat. So, we could just as easily have flipped it, saying temperature is inversely proportional to heat(hot has a lower temp than cold). There are actually compelling reasons to do measure “temperature” this way, in relation to the way the “heat” of an object is distributed among the particles that make it up

It's impossible, improbable, and very highly unlikely. We Humans are bastards and will continue being bastards until our robot/alien overlords enslave us all. People have always had selfish vested interests in things. Just like how lions and hyenas and leopards are in competition for food in the wild, it's ingrained in us. Survival of the fittest. Natural selection and stuff. For world peace to occur, every single person has to change their perspective and be more accomodating. What's the probability of that happening? As long as there has been things that happened before and people remember them, there will always be strife.

The best example of this is something I might have read or heard somewhere.. someone said if White Supremacists had their way and absolutely eradicated all black people, the hate wouldn't stop there. Then it'd be "your hair is dark and your eyes aren't blue, you are not truly white." It's a nice thought but would never happen.

[removed]

wat da fak

[removed]

Hotter objects have higher kinetic energy. The faster the particles move the more kinetic energy so the higher the temperature.

And if you couldn't guess colder objects have slower moving particles so less kinetic energy resulting in lower temperatures.

i do not agree.

one can make the argument, that e.g. in a flash drive one can always read the voltage of a memory cell and interpret it either as a one or a zero. thus, there is always data on the drive its just "unorganized" , i.e. not containing any meaning, before you intentionally upload a file to the drive.

similarly, if you delete a file usually the pc just assigns those memory cells to be free to be overwritten, but the contents remains unchangend until another file is written ontop of it (this is also the reason why delete files can often be restored using special programms). to truly "delete" the data, you would have to overwrite all the memory cells with a new value. this however does not "destroy" the memory cells but rather assigns a new value to them.

this i very similar to matter. you can convert it from a structured form (e.g. wood) to an unstructured form such as CO2 and other gasses, but the individual atoms remain the same.

however, to really continue this discussion, we would first need to define what exactly "digitla data" means and what it means to destroy data.

considering "cold" isnt a thing and is just the absence of heat, id argue that the number goes up as there is "more heat"

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Absolutely! We should all strive to make the world a cooler place, not just in terms of temperature but also in terms of understanding & acceptance. Let's break down these arbitrary boundaries & create a more inclusive environment for everyone.