I firmly believe that a “crustless ice mantle” meets the definition of an ocean.

  • 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 3rd, 2023

help-circle





  • No, even without an atmosphere you have to contend with the diffraction-limited resolving power through an aperture (pupil), which is related to the diameter of the aperture and the wavelength of light.

    A diffraction process is, mathematically, a fourier transform. A fundamental mathematical feature of a fourier transform is what’s known as the uncertainty principle.

    Side note: you’ve probably heard of the special case of an uncertainty principle encountered in quantum mechanics frequently misattributed to the head of the Nazi nuclear program (Heisenberg), but this mathematical principle was actually well known for centuries beforehand, and the misattribution is mostly because of Nazi propaganda. We see it anywhere a fourier transform is used, from optics to orbital dynamics to quantum particles. This mathematical phenomenon is frequently miscited as quantum “weirdness” even though there’s nothing quantum (or all that weird) about it.

    The pupil restricts the possible positions of incoming photons. A restriction in position increases the variance of momenta (for a photon, speed never changes, but the momentum vector can still change direction). A smaller pupil is more restrictive and causes the image to be blurrier as the incoming photons from each object you are trying to resolve. If you want to be able to resolve smaller angular sizes (small objects at large distances), you need a large aperture that reduces position restrictions on incoming photons and therefore diffraction-induced blurring due to momentum uncertainties.

    Look up Airy diffraction for the special case of a circular aperture (e.g. a pupil or telescope).





  • AnIndefiniteArticle@sh.itjust.worksto> Greentext@lemmy.mlMath
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    designed to penetrate body armor

    wrong gun to carry for personal defense

    Depends on what you’re defending against! Only people wearing kevlar body armor are cops, militants, and ice hockey goalies. I don’t know much about guns, but from the description you’re replying to this sounds like the right one for personal defense against wannabe fascist militias and overfunded/overarmed police forces. I agree it’s the wrong gun to defend against the defenseless, but shooting the defenseless is not what I think of when someone says “personal defense”.






  • If he’s getting results cleaning up Trump’s mess, it’s because of his team. Showcase his team and all the work they’ve done. It’s his choice of cabinet members and Supreme Court nominations that we are voting for.

    That and the military is all the president really does. Our system of military alliances are a mess. Joe inherited that and young people are demonstrating that they want to see that changed.

    The moderate play is to showcase the people who a vote for Trump would fire. John Oliver’s piece on Schedule F hits on that well. This is an important core feature of why we want Joe.

    He also needs to do something to adapt our foreign policy (which is the President’s core power) to the people’s desire to change our role on the world stage to a less violent one.

    He needs both to win big for the dems. It doesn’t matter if he’s feeble and old if the election isn’t about him. It isn’t. This election is about the fundamental nature of what our country is. America has to confront its darkness and fix itself. Neutral isn’t an option when we’ve been going in reverse. Where are we going? Set a destination for what America should strive to be, and ask people to vote for that.

    The circus format makes people want the big strong man barking out at the debates. We need the man intensely feeling the moment he’s in with looks of pain as he tries to process his predecessor’s ranting. We need to show the people and system of civil rights/service/reparations that a vote for Uncle Joe represents.

    Trump 2 is the American Revolution finally ending with its version of a Napoleon moment. Hey: we held out a bit longer than the French!

    Biden 2 is four more years of life support. Educate us on the people and their roles, Joe. Open up for democracy and new ideas to build a new America. We need to know what’s there in order to collectively imagine what could be. We need to know who else we are voting for when we vote for Joe. He needs to set the stage for people to feel like they are voting to build and protect an America that they want to live in.

    Ultimately, we need some constitutional amendments to fix our broken government. Evolve past an enlightenment-era collapse pattern and into something that can last. Maybe run on a slate of amendments that a vote for Joe would endorse. Undo Citizens United, cement Roe, net neutrality, rank choice voting, etc. Make a list and have everyone agree that that is what we are voting for. If he wins with that pitch, he has a good argument for either congress or the states to ratify the amendments, or to call a convention if they don’t follow through. Let Trump write a list of amendments, too, and put it up to a vote. Joe’s Constitution vs Trump’s Constitution. Joe’s American vs Trump’s America. Actually, ending up with two constitutions up to a vote like that sounds like the start of civil war II: which states ratify which constitution to get behind which president. Maybe that’s just where we are headed, unless we can be convinced to use a civil way of negotiating for a new system. A civil way would be more responsive to nuance and less prone to bake-in of ideas due to backlash.

    We need that next revolution, but first we need to set up a system of civil resolution to make sure that it doesn’t destroy us.





  • Thanks for pointing out that in this case the DM is using X regardless of whatever graphical environment gets loaded when the user logs in. This really is a moot point/discussion. I’m still glad I raised it to get perspectives like yours.

    You’re right that I should play around with wlroots a bit more. It’s been a while, personally. Mostly because it’s been a while since I’ve had time to just play around with my system. My life is at a point that it looks like I’ll have that free time soon, for better or for worse.

    I’ll note that I do like alternative init systems for diversity and competition and because systemd was very hungry and rigid. An init system is also a bit more fundamental to system stability than a display server, so I think it’s reasonable to be critical of systemd and Wayland for contradictory reasons. Systemd has also come a very long way in the past decade plus. I have also seen it learn from the other ideas implemented in its competition, mirroring your argument. Diversity and unification are not at odds with each other, but are different parts of the same cycle of improvement.


  • Good to know that this has been implemented in your favorite DE! Considering how Wayland often implements things, it’s probably implemented on the DE-level, leading to a fractured configuration ecosystem. Being implemented in Wayland is different from being implemented in some of the DEs that use Wayland.

    edit: if I’m wrong about that, and it is implemented in Wayland itself, please continue to correct me!