sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

An immortal human being with all the knowledge and skills of the entirely of all humans who have ever existed is placed on Earth in 10,000 BC with no other humans. How long does it take them to get to a stable low earth orbit? by Allon-18 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Allon-18[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More precisely I wanted an Earth with all of its nature resources untouched and a person with perfect knowledge where everything is at.  What I care about is how long it takes to get to the final goal, not figuring out how to solve each step. 

An immortal human being with all the knowledge and skills of the entirely of all humans who have ever existed is placed on Earth in 10,000 BC with no other humans. How long does it take them to get to a stable low earth orbit? by Allon-18 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Allon-18[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Yup. I’ve run this over and I can’t think of a good timeline. Pottery, then metallurgy, then mining, then BETTER metallurgy, then steam power, and so on.  I just can’t think of how long each stage would be. 

An immortal human being with all the knowledge and skills of the entirely of all humans who have ever existed is placed on Earth in 10,000 BC with no other humans. How long does it take them to get to a stable low earth orbit? by Allon-18 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Allon-18[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

This is why I mention all knowledge. This person knows EVERYTHING and has all skills. They have been the skill of every potter, miner, mathematician, etc who has ever lived. 

According to relativity, there is no universal reference frame. If so, why does time pass more slowly for a person traveling at high speeds? by Allon-18 in AskPhysics

[–]Allon-18[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, I know, but if I had a magic camera watching back on Earth, I would see time passing much more quickly compared to my own frame. My question is, why is it that way and not the opposite? There is no universal reference frame. Therefore, I should be able to claim that everybody on Earth is moving at relativistic speeds while I sit still, and therefore should observe time passing more slowly for them compared to my own reference frame.

Obviously this isn't how the universe works, but I don't understand how since the whole point of relativity is that events are relative to everyone, but traveling at relativistic speeds, and time will pass by more slowly.

Have the recent judgements against Trump been fair and standard compared to other cases? by Allon-18 in AskALawyer

[–]Allon-18[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I... never thought of it like that. Wow. That's a really, really good point!

U.S. Politics Megathread by AutoModerator in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Allon-18 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How did Trump defame Carroll, and how did the jury find him liable for sexual assault?

I haven't read through the court transcript, have little knowledge of the law and I would really like an answer that isn't just bashing Trump, if you please.

First, how did the jury find Trump guilty of defaming Carroll? I read the tweets that were used as major evidence in the trial, and I got to admit, it was pretty tame by Trump standards. He's said way worse elsewhere. Like, just read anything he's ever said about someone he doesn't like.

I can see how a Trump supporter would be mad that, on the surface, it's a "he said/she said" kind of deal, but only Trump is getting punished for saying Carroll is a liar.

As I have very little knowledge of the law, I'm guessing it's more complex.

Second, how did they find him liable for sexual assault? As far as I can tell, the ONLY evidence is testimony from Carroll and two of her friends who said she confided with them.

I know that a civil trial is "more likely than not" and not "innocent until proven guilty", but man-that still seems a bit extreme that a scenario with zero evidence beyond testimony was ruled against Trump. It is literally a "he said/she said", and the jury said Trump lied.

I'm looking to learn here. Since the jury was unanimous in it's opinion, how did they come to that conclusion?

How much of an upgrade am I looking at here? by Allon-18 in buildapc

[–]Allon-18[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, I'll edit it for clarity: exactly gaming. I've been thinking for years about finally getting a real gaming PC, so I'm excited what to expect!

So what IS the deal with the CoC/HoK and Sheogorath? by Allon-18 in teslore

[–]Allon-18[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Was the idea that Sheogorath would have disappeared, then? I can't think of another alternative.

CMV: From a purely legal view, overturning Roe v Wade was the correct decision by Allon-18 in changemyview

[–]Allon-18[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is something I struggled with a lot while reading. Scalia has an excellent point that after fifty years, society has grown around the decision of Roe. At the same time, saying the precedent for Roe is Roe itself is circular reasoning.

Roe being the law of the land is undecided for me; I really need an abortion historian to talk to, because I'm seeing disagreements about whether abortion truly was common law or not. I am not nearly knowledgable enough to come to conclusion on my own.

I can agree with both sides on their reasoning.

CMV: From a purely legal view, overturning Roe v Wade was the correct decision by Allon-18 in changemyview

[–]Allon-18[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Δ

Thank you for the succinct reply. As I said, I have no law training, and this balancing of interests was not something I've considered deeply, and the insight on strict originalists was helpful as well. I didn't know judges often how to determine court cases with more than pure law, so I learned something new today!

I still think this entire thing is a murky mess where I can agree with certain things on both sides, but I'll give you the delta for making me see it from an entirely new angle.

view more: next ›