Ok. That makes sense.
And no, I'm not doing anything funny on my computer right now, but thanks for not asking.
And no, I'm not doing anything funny on my computer right now, but thanks for not asking.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Also, notice all those parts of the game that are repeated over and over again? They store those once, then just tell the processor to draw them multiple times. The game also uses a tiny subset of the possible colors for a modern computer system (I believe the NES used a 4-bit color palette, where the game developer would select only 16 colors to draw the stuff in the game world, as opposed to our usual 24-bit color scheme which allows for nearly 17 million different colors).Okay. This one kind of stumps me.
How is it even possible that the entire ROM contained in the cartridge of Burger Time for Nintendo is 28 kb but the actual picture of the game, right here,
is more than the game itself weighing in at 41 kb?
Well, pressure is basically an energy density. And it is generally expected that there is an upper limit to energy density near the Planck scale. Of course, we haven't been able to build experiments anywhere near the Planck scale (it's about 10^15, or around a quadrillion, times the energies the LHC can access).
Roughly 1GeV. Mass doesn't change with velocityIf we were to accelerate a proton to these kind of energies what mass would it have?
Its rest mass would remain a paltry 1.67 x 10−27 kg, but I personally dislike thinking of mass as a function of velocity. At relativistic speeds, it acts as if it's much heavier, but that's more convention than any physical increase in mass.If we were to accelerate a proton to these kind of energies what mass would it have?
Do you mean during the T-Tauri stage of the Sun's formation? If yes, then should we be able to correlate the elemental composition of objects suspected to be from the Oort cloud with the elemental composition of the matter thought to have been swept off the planets' surfaces during T-Tauri time? By which I mean, should the Oort-derived objects be enriched in light elements such as hydrogen and helium?An enormous bubble of rocks pushed out to their current position by the outward push of the solar wind, probably during the creation of the Solar System.
I'm not sure it's quite that simple. Likely much of the matter was blown out of the solar system entirely. But yes, the Oort cloud should be heavier in light elements (relatively speaking) than the inner solar system. However, it looks like none of the Oort cloud objects have enough mass to hold onto gaseous hydrogen or helium, so it is likely that all of the helium has escaped, as has all of the hydrogen that wasn't bound into larger molecules (e.g. water).Do you mean during the T-Tauri stage of the Sun's formation? If yes, then should we be able to correlate the elemental composition of objects suspected to be from the Oort cloud with the elemental composition of the matter thought to have been swept off the planets' surfaces during T-Tauri time? By which I mean, should the Oort-derived objects be enriched in light elements such as hydrogen and helium?
I'm not sure it's quite that simple. Likely much of the matter was blown out of the solar system entirely. But yes, the Oort cloud should be heavier in light elements (relatively speaking) than the inner solar system. However, it looks like none of the Oort cloud objects have enough mass to hold onto gaseous hydrogen or helium, so it is likely that all of the helium has escaped, as has all of the hydrogen that wasn't bound into larger molecules (e.g. water).
Not to the ground, I don't think. The Earth's magnetic fields and the atmosphere prevent this. Basically, the hot plasma from the Sun may be hot, but by the time it gets to the Earth it's too spread out to heat up the atmosphere much.Could fire from the Sun ever make it to Earth and scorch part of the land?
What would it take for this to happen?
Well, if that is based on a real event, a more likely interpretation is a meteor impact. Could also have been a volcanic eruption.Okay.
I was just asking due to this thread that I was reading.
Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?, page 1
I don't think so. If you want to talk about the ultimate causes for the behavior of biological organisms, you really have to look to evolution. Basically, there are no pre-defined rules for the behavior of organisms. Instead, the behavior of organisms is a complex combination of evolutionary history and environment.I have been reading about entropy and order, and that high infromation hetrogenous states (if I have it right) are less likely than low information homogenous states (or something similar).
I was wondering if this apples to social conformity? Is conformity to a group's norms like a gass with all the molecules behaving similarly, and non-conformity like a statistically improbable movement of the molecules to an unusual configuration? IOW is my behaviour expressing physical laws when I go along with the crowd, and is the crowd expressing them when impelling me to do thus?
No, definitely not! It's basically going to depend upon the social structure: if the members of the species reproduce more effectively by conforming to the crowd, then over time the members that conform more will win out. If the members who go against the crowd end up having more children, then the species will move towards less conformity.Thanks!
So you cant infer that as a species, excluding chaotic fluctuations, we will tend wowards cultural uniformity just as a gass will spread evenly throughout a vessel.
Well, my impression is that in the right context, both conformity and standing out are beneficial for reproduction. Conformity helps because you need the support of other members of society to survive. Nonconformity helps because it helps you to find a mate and have children.I was just wondering why it is so difficult to do odd things, and there is so much resistance in the form of social pressure to conform. For instance if I were to copy Dali and wear a fried egg on my head there could well be a bit of a reaction - tending to "normalise" or undifferentiate my behavior and asking me to "fit in".
I don't have a clear understanding of how this could be shown.I also might add another speculation that culture is evolving (in non linear fashion) towards science and technology because they are lower energy ways of fulfilling the same objectives, which reminds me of the idea of the path of least resistance. Given objective Omega, path A will be selected over path B if it is more efficient. Thoughts?
But on the whole given punctuated evolution, the crowd would tend to be more adapted otherwise they would not reach that number (why would maladapts predmonate rather than breed less. Therefore 'the crowd is adapted' could be a heuristic.). In any case I was thinking of multiverses where I wore an egg on my head like Salvador DAli did. Maybe in some parallel it would pass without comment but I am tending to think that in most is is more likely for some reason in most possible worlds to provoke a regulatory resonse towards something more uniform.No, definitely not! It's basically going to depend upon the social structure: if the members of the species reproduce more effectively by conforming to the crowd, then over time the members that conform more will win out. If the members who go against the crowd end up having more children, then the species will move towards less conformity.
How is this if the crowd are the majority force, and bacause of stabilising selection I suppose they would tend to be the ones having children. So going with the crowd actually as a rule increases fitness.Well, my impression is that in the right context, both conformity and standing out are beneficial for reproduction. Conformity helps because you need the support of other members of society to survive. Nonconformity helps because it helps you to find a mate and have children.
I would argue that behavior pattern that is reinforced earlier tends to survive better than one that is rewarded later, all else being equal. So taking the plane to another continent is more common than walking. This might be called the game theory of physics. The rational choice of the system to make is the laziest, most energy efficient.I don't have a clear understanding of how this could be shown.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?