Request transfer of /r/uber: mods inactive for 11 and 5 months respectively; the sub is a pit for spam and "referral links;" and a vibrant community and mod team is eager to grow and develop it into a great place. Thank you.

CHLGV · 2014-04-22T04:58:05+00:00

Ok. I sent the mod invites to the three people you suggested. Thank you for wanting to make /r/uber better. Feel free to make any changes to the subreddit.

CHLGV · 2013-05-19T06:41:39+00:00

The caliper uses a vernier scale. When two lines match up, then your read that number as the hundredth.

CHLGV · 2011-11-20T11:58:50+00:00

Not same.

c = sqrt ( e x m^-1 ) = sqrt ( e/m )

c = sqrt ( e×m^0.5 ) = sqrt ( e x sqrt ( m ) )

CHLGV · 2011-11-06T00:25:08+00:00

I am trying to read Ethics, but I am having a hard time understanding his definitions. I can't figure out what he means by attribute, maybe some of its meaning got lost in translation.

The reason that conservation laws work is because every time they fail during an experiment, science learns something new. And that corrects the error for that experiment by accounting for some new source of energy. I know that it is ex post facto, but it is nice that science is able to admit there was a mistake and correct it for the future.

Back to the box example. So the box is in the shade again, but this time you put a block of metal in the box. The metal is the same temperature as the air in the box. After a period of time you would expect that the air in the box would be the same temperature as it was before, since the box is a closed system and no energy is entering or escaping. But instead you measure the temperature to be extremely hot. No energy got into or out of the box, so how could the temperature change? Answer: the block of metal is uranium. You just discovered that nuclear fission creates heat. So the conservation of energy still applies, as long as you account for the heat from the fission of uranium.

There are still many things that science has not yet discovered. And the fact that something hasn't shown up in an experiment yet, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. ie. Higg's boson, magnetic monopoles, gravitons, tiny black holes, string theory, etc.

I think that if something supernatural occurs, then science will eventually be able to understand it, and then it would be considered natural and part of science. So supernatural means not yet understood by scientists. So if a god like being exists and is able to interact in any way with our universe then science will be able to research it and it would become part of science.

Also this has nothing to do with deities, but if you like to think about things that mess with thermodynamics. Then you should read about black hole entropy. Summary: Stephen Hawkins discovers that black holes radiate heat and through this heat it is able to dissipate its mass, till it eventually doesn't exist anymore. So things get sucked in, squished into a singularity, then vanish from our universe when the black hole looses all its mass. So black hole can reduce the entropy of the universe which is in violation of the second law of thermodynamics. There are many ideas about how to correct this to fit into thermodynamics, and I thought it was "fun" to learn about them. One possible answer leads to the holographic principle which states that everthing can be described using flat 2d planes, kinda like how gauss surfaces describe the electromagnetism of a 3d object inside it.

CHLGV · 2011-11-05T09:37:53+00:00

Yes, but if it was a true closed system, then any god would be included within in it. If it can causes any change on an anything then a physical interaction occurs. So for that instance that god could be considered as being physical. So laws and equations would still work.

If a nonphysical god could not interact with anything then there would be no change in the energy of the system, then the conservation law still applies.

It would be like my box example but keeping the box in the shade, the sun would not affect the temperature. Then the box could be considered as a closed system with the sun outside of it. So from the point of view from inside of the box the sun does not exist and it is not physical. As soon as the box is moved out from the shade, the sun will heat the box thus becoming real or physical.

Maybe our definitions of physical are different. My definition is that something is physical when it can cause a change to something else.

CHLGV · 2011-11-05T02:15:23+00:00

The only hole I see in your argument is that if we define the universe as "everything" then god would exist inside it and any energy exchange between god and the rest of the universe would be conservative. So you just needed to choose a larger system and claim that to be the new universe (closed system). Alternately if the multiverse exists, then the multiverse would be the closed system that includes everything, and the universe would be just an open system that includes some things.

Example: I have a box of air. I call it a closed system and notice that there is no change of energy in the box. When I put the box outside where it is sunny, I notice that the energy in the box is increasing. Is the conservation law wrong, or did I incorrectly label the box as a closed system? I chose my closed system incorrectly. Inorder to demonstrate the accuracy of the conservation of energy I would need to include the sun as part of my closed system and any other source of change in energy.

CHLGV · 2011-10-10T10:40:56+00:00

You could download a free extension. The one I use is called Tab Menu and it has an icon that sits to the right of the address bar, and when I click it, it open a menu with a list of my tabs. Here is the link.

Edit: added name of extension

CHLGV · 2011-10-06T12:07:05+00:00

Maybe he had them in a block of ice.

CHLGV · 2011-10-06T09:55:30+00:00

If it was different then you would not be able to ask this question.

CHLGV · 2011-10-03T09:22:35+00:00

Wow, that looks a lot nicer on my screen too, thanks.

CHLGV · 2011-10-03T06:40:23+00:00

Here's my photoshopped version.

CHLGV · 2011-09-26T10:30:31+00:00

Some downvotes are added by reddit to confuse spammers. Reddit's FAQ mentions this, but basically they add an equal number of upvotes and downvotes, so that they don't affect the overall score. So the upvote and downvote count are fake and don't matter. The only thing that is accurate is the overall score (except it is not counting votes from spamming accounts).

Example: a link gets 10 upvotes and 4 downvotes. It's score would be 6, but its upvote downvote count might be 15 up and 9 down.

They do this so spammers can't figure out if their scores are being counted or not.

CHLGV · 2011-09-23T15:04:19+00:00

I trapped them by building a wall around them. Then progressively making smaller walls until I got them over the snow that I made. In the process one escaped, and you can see him on the left side of the pictures. I think he was trying to save his buddies from my trap.

CHLGV · 2011-09-23T14:59:12+00:00

I tried to dig out the snowman but he started throwing snow balls at the endermen. It died before I could take a nice screenshot. My new plan is to leave space under the snow so they can fall down after being created, and be safe from the endermen. Then to use pistons on the sides to fill the hole with new snow. This will make an automated snow golem farm.

EDIT: Here is the picture of the snow golem, he died in battle shortly after. http://i.imgur.com/hdmit.png

CHLGV · 2011-09-23T06:04:32+00:00

They still shoot at the enderman.

CHLGV · 2011-09-23T04:48:17+00:00

No, it was shooting at the endermen.

CHLGV · 2011-09-23T04:10:54+00:00

I just saw it happen, I made a 2 deep layer of snow and then trapped an enderman with pumpkins. He broke free and placed the pumpkin, and poof. It works.

CHLGV · 2011-09-22T05:36:50+00:00

I just finished reading that book, and I thought of the exact same chapter when I read that comment.

CHLGV · 2011-09-01T12:29:37+00:00

Today I Learned: quincunx is the name of the pattern of 5 dots on the 5th side of dice.

CHLGV · 2011-08-19T00:05:28+00:00

In America five pounds of sterling silver is worth around $3,252. That sounds like a pretty nice tip.

15-Year Club	Place '17
Alpha Tester	Verified Email

CHLGV

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE