wolframhydroxide
@wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
- Comment on BAAAAAABY SHARK DO-DO-DO-DO-DO-DO 12 hours ago:
Yeah, we were singing it a long time before the internet was a thing accessible to children. It was passed down by those who went to camps along with such songs as “da moose da moose”
- Comment on meat honey 15 hours ago:
Actually, that’s a really good point to which I really want to know the answer. We have to assume that, since it’s effectively fermented meat, the prion would survive, but maybe they’re really efficient at turning all of the protein into unbound amino acids?
- Comment on i'm the perfect fit 1 day ago:
Ah, yes, whatever would we do if nobody was stopping international conflicts from getting out of control? If the UN werent there to stop them, we might have the most-heavily-armed nation in the history of humanity actively funding genocide by a client state (with the actual diplomats saying their goal was to start literal Armageddon), kidnapping heads of state, assassinating heads of state, and suborning the second-most-nuke-filled country’s annexation of another country by lifting embargoes! Man, could you imagine if the headquarters of the United Nations were in THAT country, and everybody just… Did nothing? Man, what a crazy world we would live in.
- Comment on Finally, an optimal monitor configuration! 5 days ago:
But it reduces the us able space in the middle, as any rectilinearly-designed webpages will have areas on the far left and right that aren’t viewable except in small parts while scrolling.
- Comment on Ray is basic. 6 days ago:
Sharks are older than the current rings of Saturn, and I’ll bet that the e-ring or f-ring (whichever one is primarily made of ice spewed out of enceladus) has been around for a few billion years.
- Comment on Firearm Advice 1 week ago:
I was just finishing the Card Against Humanity:
- Comment on Firearm Advice 1 week ago:
“The fleshy fun bridge”
- Comment on IBM 1979 variation 1 week ago:
Padme meme: “you mean all the ram in the computer, right?” Anakin: Padme: you mean all the RAM in the computer, right?
- Comment on Just one more square bro 1 week ago:
Ah, no, it’s that the more efficient packing takes up less space, so the less efficient square is actually slightly larger than the other, compared to the smaller squares.
If the smaller squares are identical in both sets, then the larger square in the less-efficient set will be slightly larger than the larger square in the more efficient set.
- Comment on Just one more square bro 1 week ago:
Since a link to a wiki article does not an explanation make:
The optimal efficiency (zero interstitial space) is achieved when the ratio of the side length of the larger square to the sides of the shorter squares (called the “packing coefficient”) is precisely equal to the square root of the number of smaller squares. Hence why the case of n=25, with a packing coefficient of 5, is actually more efficient than the packing of n=17 given in the waffle iron, with a packing coefficient of 4.675. Since sqrt(25)=5, that case is a perfectly efficient packing, equivalent to the case of n=16 with coefficient of 4. Since sqrt(17)=4.123, the waffle packing (represented by the orangutan) above is not perfectly efficient, leaving interstices. However, the packing coefficient of the suboptimal solution (represented by the girl) is actually 4.707, slightly further from sqrt(17), and thus less efficient, leaving greater wasted interstitial space.
- Comment on I want to replay Skyrim but 1 week ago:
Did you try “beyond skyrim: bruma”? Its only one province of the planned entirety of tamriel, but that was many excellent hours of exploration, and it feels like the plotlines are really going somewhere, whenever they get finished with the rest of cyrodiil. Shame there are some places that feel unfinished (because they involve other provinces), but that mystery made it more intriguing, in my opinion.
Also, it has a soundtrack that I actually like more than the original skyrim soundtrack, and that is saying something.
- Comment on Just one more square bro 1 week ago:
Specifically, the optimal area side length of the larger square for any integer n is the square root of n. The closer your larger side length gets to sqrt(n), the more efficient your packing.
- Comment on Just one more square bro 1 week ago:
I was just answering your question of why someone would want to arrange a prime number of squares. The waffle is clearly a meme.
- Comment on Harvard Places Math Professor Martin Nowak on Paid Administrative Leave Over Epstein Ties 1 week ago:
Precisely. Wilhoit’s Law
- Comment on Just one more square bro 2 weeks ago:
That candy crush story is, as the commenter said, a lie. I don’t know why they would suggest that adding on a lie is in any way good, since we know that this packing was discovered in the late 1990s. It’s on the wikipedia article for square packing (with sources) but I don’t feel like looking it up again.
- Comment on Harvard Places Math Professor Martin Nowak on Paid Administrative Leave Over Epstein Ties 2 weeks ago:
I would still say it was a country of laws, but that is not the same thing as a country of justice.
- Comment on Harvard Places Math Professor Martin Nowak on Paid Administrative Leave Over Epstein Ties 2 weeks ago:
The united states has not been a society of laws since 2017, and anyone telling you otherwise is either blind, stupid, lying, or some combination of the three
- Comment on Just one more square bro 2 weeks ago:
I mean, the actual answer is severalfold: “sometimes, when you need to fill a space, you don’t end up with simple compound numbers of identical packages” is one,but really, it’s a problem in mathematics which, were we to have a general solution to find the most efficient method of packing n objects with identical properties into the smallest area, we would be able to more effectively predict natural structures, including predicting things like protein folding, which is a huge area of medical research.
- Comment on Honk 2 weeks ago:
Don’t forget aye-aye
- Comment on Honk 2 weeks ago:
Olm
- Comment on Just one more square bro 2 weeks ago:
Precisely. That’s why I wrote the parenthetical about the greater efficiency of 16 as a perfect square. As the other commenter pointed out, this is a meme.
- Comment on Just one more square bro 2 weeks ago:
Exactly. It is the length of the side of the bigger square, relative to the sides of the smaller identical squares.
- Comment on Just one more square bro 2 weeks ago:
For the uninitiated: this is the current most - efficient method found of packing 17 unit squares inside another square. You may not like it, but this is what peak efficiency looks like.
(Of course, 16 squares has a packing coefficient of 4, compared to this arrangement’s 4.675, so this is just what peak efficiency looks like for 17 squares)
- Comment on Little scritchy 2 weeks ago:
IIRC, this is from the worst case scenario survival handbook, but has been edited. This is a method of fishing, and you’re supposed to hook the gills like that.
- Comment on No More Neutral ⚛ 2 weeks ago:
“Wish granted. Electrons, being a human construct, have now always been defined slightly differently. Just as Franklin got the polarity wrong and you still use his labeling system, J.J. Thompson will now have fundamentally misunderstood the nature of the electron, leading to a cascading assumption by later scientists that the number of electrons in a neutral atom is one greater than the number of protons. Even though this completely breaks the math of quantum mechanics, everyone is just used to subtracting one at this point. This is a significantly worse world, and as a bonus, every physicist who sees you will now be preternaturally certain that you are personally to blame. You’re welcome.”
- Comment on Liminal Space 3 weeks ago:
Science didn’t give us the guillotine, no matter which scientific method or forbear you’re using to determine scientific nature. At best, engineering gave us the guillotine, but I rather doubt there was any actual engineering design going on when they first made the Halifax Gibbet.
- Comment on Small little shenanigans 3 weeks ago:
All excellent points. I concede to your deeper consideration.
- Comment on Small little shenanigans 3 weeks ago:
Zinc has a characteristic blue tint and oxidizes to white.
- Comment on Small little shenanigans 3 weeks ago:
Except that they’re clearly zinc shot. I think the poster made a funny without realising that they aren’t steel.
- Comment on Small little shenanigans 3 weeks ago:
These aren’t bearing balls. They’re zinc shot.
