Recent comments in /f/science

edgeplayer t1_j99svpi wrote

If the sphere is totally precise, it suggests that the object is over-described in our space. Why is it not possible for its radius to vary. But we are dealing with objects that are spinning very fast. Maybe the spinrate, in rings is approaching the rate where it shreds. So the answer will be in a physical law that has spinrate as a parameter.

1

Daaru_ t1_j99rwsw wrote

It's like the plot of Dallas Buyers' Club, if any research suggests that something expensive is better then it will be used regardless of how efficacious it is. It's not black and white like a conspiracy and instead varying shades of grey. Vitamin C gave mixed results without toxicity instead of chemotherapy drugs giving mostly positive results with toxicity being a common side effect, so the latter is more medically sound for treating the issue for doctors. You learn pretty quickly that many doctors accept harmful side effects if the issue is treated at the expense of the patients.

1

5ol5hine t1_j99r1kl wrote

I only know that it is common among people that struggle with mental health to worry that their issues aren't serious or severe enough to deserve the status of the actual diagnose. It does seems likely to me that issues from one part of ones life can affect another. Did your current struggles at work start after the traumatizing divorce?

3

seanbrockest t1_j99poc9 wrote

Yeah, "40 million times greater than a bowl of rice crispies" isn't helpful OR scientifically accurate.

I mean come on, everyone knows skim milk makes them louder.

49

uncadul t1_j99pja5 wrote

Clearly you do not need to review (or ask me to review for you) the entire histories of the listed countries to find examples of violence conducted by Buddhist people, similar to the kinds of violence conducted by all kinds of people irrespective of religion or philosophy.

1

Xaendeau t1_j99kvq7 wrote

For real? Ok, sure.

Measuring this more precisely let's people know better that reality works like equations predict. If we know there's a discrepancy, we can discover why and learn new science...which doesn't benefit Americans in 2023, but might be a piece of a puzzle that benefits Americans in 2073. Advances in the standard model paves the way for exotic technology that becomes commonplace decades later.

Maxwell published that electromagnetic propagation should happen back in something like 1865. These had zero applications in 1865, but by 1901, there was wireless communication across the Atlantic. Around 150 years later, you were typing this comment on a phone or computer that is a direct engineering application of Maxwell's equations, such as light coming out of your screen to read these words, sending data across the internet, and CPU/GPU/motherboard architecture.

1

Xaendeau t1_j99iz8j wrote

While I'm waiting for the sudafed to hopefully help my sinuses, I'd like to know why you think money spent in basic science is a bad use of taxes. Scientific research and educational funding is something I'm passionate about. It's the best way to spend tax dollars.

I'm here all night, my face hurts too much to sleep.

1

Xaendeau t1_j99gg29 wrote

Hey man, stay ignorant if you want. It's a choice at this point. If you want actual dialogue, hit me up and I can give you examples of science that has paid exponential dividends in our society.

1

colorblood t1_j99gfip wrote

It’s probably made with carbon composites but carbon nanotubes are yet to be used in large scale construction. Aerospace is very conservative on materials especially when it means passenger safety.

2

bripi t1_j99fsr6 wrote

>This goes to show how unaware you are about how science works.

ha ha ha ha ha ha that's hilarious! I had to screenshot that comment, no one is going to believe someone said that to me. Thanks for turning this witch-hunt into something funny!

1