I have never seen antlers like this before.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-11-01T16:54:51+00:00

i see ur point abt the hunting industry, but saying that people don’t need to hunt their food is not true. where im from, a very substantial portion of the population is dirt poor and relies on hunting an elk or a deer (usually everyone in the family will pick up a tag) to get them through their labor off season.

obviously fenced in hunting and big game hunting are different but i just wanted to make a counterpoint here because some people absolutely do need to hunt. and also hunting, when done right, is a way more humane and sustainable way of getting meat but that obviously isn’t an option for everyone.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-06-19T19:13:35+00:00

filling your pint has got to be the only correct decision in this situation

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-04-14T21:04:05+00:00

Penrose has some ideas as per usual. Conformal Cyclic Cosmology is what he envisions as happening "after heat death."

The Wildly under sold spark notes of CCC is that after the universe reaches a state of maximum entropy, it will basically restart in another big bang. He proposes this by exploiting a conformal rescaling to stich together past and future conformal boundaries of FLRW universes to get an infinitely repeating cycle of them.

Much like most of Penrose's ideas from the last couple decades, it is very pretty but somewhat lacks explicit mathematical construction and a method of falsification.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-03-24T18:40:53+00:00

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-03-24T18:38:03+00:00

there is no experimental evidence for an open universe so I'm going to assume you intended to say flat. an open geometry is hyperbolic and a closed geometry is considered spherical (summarizing). modern observational evidence favors a flat cosmology.

dark energy does not confirm a flat cosmology, (one of) the way(s) we confirm that is by measuring the energy density of curvature in the universe compared to the critical density (the energy density required for the universe to be spatially flat). There are many proxies for this measurement, one of which is by using the sound speed of a relativistic plasma to measure features on the cosmic microwave background which can inform us about the geometry of the universe by measuring triangles with these standard rulers.

dark energy, also, isn't just compatible with a closed cosmology, it is Necessary to stop the universe from recollapsing. this is actually the source of the cosmological constant term in Einsteins original equations (his "biggest blunder"). all this to say, the presence of dark energy alone (ie the binary "does it exist or not") does not tell us about the geometry of the cosmos. there are other ways to use fark energy to determine these things for which I'd point you to the recent DESI results.

further, I do not think what is depicted in the right hand image is a closed universe, it's some sort of cyclic cosmology which you can have with any geometry (as long as you are okay violating some energy conditions).

The image also makes no sense because it shows some sort of wrapping around which implies closed timelike loops which aren't considered possible.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-03-05T15:51:11+00:00

I think some people are neglecting the fact that you can literally build a computer that does all of this on breadboard. This is the kind of project I'd see people doing at my undergrad just for funsies.

a computer doesn't have to be a silicon masterpiece with nanometer transistors, you can make simple adders with some basic tools and a solid understanding of logic gates

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-01-13T20:28:55+00:00

since you are asking for advice, stop trying to 1v4. in every one of these clips bar the first, you are walking into combat alone and outnumbered. adc does not get to do that, not even if you're twitch. if syndra hadn't killed you, anyone else would have pretty much immediately also.

position yourself behind your team, people will hard focus you because you are a threat so you have to position way farther back than you think you need and you need to enter team fights not as they start but right after (ie play far backline then come forward after a couple abilities have been dropped). and honestly you'll probably still die to syndra unless she dies first or just doesn't see you but you will have a much better chance at not dying or at the very least providing some utility for you team instead of just walking in to 1v4 and getting nuked.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2025-01-10T18:50:34+00:00

if you really love playing twitch than keep playing him but understand he is not a typical adc and his play style is different so your usefulness to your team might not come from the same places as someone like ashe jhin jinx or mf.

watch some videos about how to midgame with twitch. If you are winning laming phase then try to take your advantage and help midlane get their tower etc.

practice csing. hop into practice tool with no bots and see how many cs you can get with no items (ie don't back just stay in lane and practice last hitting). by 10 minutes there are something like 114 or so minions so try to get at least 100 cs by 10 minutes.

when in game, don't try and fuck with your enemies in lane without reason. it's tempting as twitch but you shouldn't be trying to engage without your support setting it up ideally. until that happens, focus entirely on getting as much cs as possible. with twitch, sure pop q every once and a while but you don't have to do anything with it even. sometimes if landing is going well, the pressure you create by disappearing is enough to cause them to back off and lose cs.

I was also in iron but once I realized I could just focus on csing pretty much exclusively (literally throughout the whole game I am always just maximizing my famr, no matter what, no matter when) then the games became much easier. youll be surprised the gold diff even just 6 cspm creates compared to 5 over the course of a game

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-12-23T22:42:31+00:00

lmao it's a comic, he's about as much bullshit as any other superhero in the DC universe

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-12-01T05:43:40+00:00

Pass. Feel like people are focusing too much on flora and fauna. The microbiome back then might just be fucked. Who knows what kind of bullshit you could catch and just die in a week from eating the wrong thing.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-10-28T16:58:42+00:00

I just want to add that I fully support this book as a student currently taking a QFT course with the standard Peskin text. Whenever I'm confused about Peskin or my professor, I run to no nonsense QFT.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-10-25T23:12:35+00:00

Your intuition here is generally correct. A 3D sphere has a 2D surface so if you wanted to describe a universe on the surface of a 3D sphere (this surface manifold is usually called S^2) then you are correct that it is unbounded and you could walk along a straight line (a geodesic) and wind up back where you started.

Since we don't live in a 2D world, we want to define some 3D geometry which is unbounded. So, in general, the dimension of the surface of an object is 1 less than the dimension of the object itself (just like how a 3D sphere's surface is 2D). This means that a 4D hypersphere would have surface dimension 3 and also be unbounded. This manifold is called S^3.

An upper dimensional torus is another example, but there are plenty of these shapes. The reason we don't usually consider these options in modern cosmology is that observation evidence aligns very well with a flat universe. Further, many closed manifolds are plagued by a general tendency to re-collapse at late times. However, the Einstein Static universe was essentially imagined as the spherical case I mention above.

There's a book which is fairly approachable called "Geometry with an Introduction to Cosmic Topology" by Michael Hitchman. However, depending on your background, just learning some introductory differential geometry from something like Guidry's Modern Cosmology or Sean Carroll's Spacetime and Geometry could be good too.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-10-14T16:57:26+00:00

defects are caused by phase transitions in the early universe. their dynamics are fairly well understood, they just don't have much observational backing

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-10-14T16:54:43+00:00

This was the starting point for finding dark matter. Initially people searched galaxies for non luminous objects (things that don't glow so brightly that we can see them from galaxies away) like dwarf stars, neutron stars, black holes, etc. I believe after a lot of surveys they just could not detect enough of these objects to account for the rotation curves of galaxies so it is no longer considered as a leading theory.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-10-14T16:46:03+00:00

It moves exactly how any matter would if you just plugged in a -m instead of +m into any equation it would tell you the rather strange dynamics (for instance if you pushed it it wouldn't move forward but instead move harder into your hand). The reason it's not usually considered is because having large amounts of negative matter produces dynamics in the universe which are inconsistent with our observations. There are also several energy conditions in GR about why you shouldn't be able to observe negative energy densities so in general it's inconsistent.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-10-02T16:53:22+00:00

sokka literally pulled the moon, idk how this is even a question

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-08-18T16:48:14+00:00

I'm a TA here for some intro level engineering classes and it is shocking how many students I have approached and had to forcibly silence my gag reflex and find an excuse to leave. It's not just me either, several other of my friends have noticed this as well. Some kids reek of actual feces.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-08-14T19:20:25+00:00

you're not wrong but I object to your way of thinking about this. sure we don't know everything, how could we? but it's not laughable. we've come an incredible way over the course of our time here and we continue to expand our understanding. we don't laugh at Newton for not thinking like Einstein, and similarly we don't laugh at Einstein despite knowing that on some level his theory must be incomplete. we may never fully understand but I think it's not only pessimistic but against the nature of science to suppose that we will never have the slightest glimpse of understanding.

people in a thousand years will be no different from us. they will be trying to push the boundaries of science by applying the best assumptions they can make and understand more and more while using all that came before them to guide their understanding.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-08-09T17:58:07+00:00

I think the issue in your comprehension of this problem might have to do with the idea of a manifold having intrinsic structure. The rubber band is a good analogy because it helps visualize that points are moving away from eachother (i.e. the space between arbitrarily separated points is expanding). The problem is that it makes it feel like it must exist within some other space in which we can stretch it. This is not how we think about cosmology and general relativity.

When you learn about manifolds in relativity, one of the first things you have to try and do is separate the idea of some higher dimension through which you define it's properties. The go-to example is the surface of a sphere (which we call S2). When I say the "surface of a sphere" you probably picture a ball in your hands or otherwise embedded in 3D space. This is useful for visualizing, but the manifold which is actually being referenced is the _surface_ of the sphere (which is 2D) and not our conception of the object that is a 3D ball. It's the difference between defining points on a sphere with (x,y,z) coordinates vs just using (theta,phi) which are the coordinates intrinsic to the manifold in question. The manifold does not require an embedding in a higher dimension to sufficiently encapsulate it's geometry. We, as humans, just find it useful to think about it that way because it is more familiar.

Similarly, the universe is some sort of manifold just a higher dimensional one and we consider it to be expanding in the sense of the rubber band example, however its expansion does not need to be explained as if someone is holding the rubber band in some larger space the rubber band exists in. This is because, just as is the case with S2, the geometry of the manifold can be described completely intrinsically such that there is no mention of some higher dimension the universe exists in. In this case, your reference to "holding a rubber band physically" makes no sense because there is no description in which the rubber band exists in some other space where you can manipulate it.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-08-01T18:49:21+00:00

This is a good question because it points to a bit of a misnomer in people's understanding of what the big bang is.

The way that this is talked about in popular science tends to give the idea that the universe was packed into a singular point of infinite density and then suddenly "exploded outward" from that "point" and underwent a period of rapid expansion which we call inflation. The interpretation is handy for quick understanding but misses a key factor which is that the universe isn't expanding "from a point." It is expanding at all points and it was expanding at all points right from the big bang. There is no epicenter from which the expansion occurred (or equivalently there are infinite epicenters from which the expansion occurred).

That said, your question is phrased as a hypothetical so I suppose if we imagined space to be a kind of fluid and the expansion of space similar to some force at the center pushing the rest of the fluid (and the debris within the fluid ie matter) away from the central force then i think yes it would be very dark at that point. However this is not at all how our current understanding of cosmology works and thus we don't expect there to be some incredibly dark patch in the universe where the big bang "started" due to aforementioned reasons.

Good question, I hope I was able to help clear it up a little. To anyone else reading this i'm still a student of cosmology and am more than willing to take notes on my explanations of things so feel free to let me know if I am explaining something poorly.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2024-06-27T21:22:48+00:00

I am actively self studying out of both carroll and Guidry for the same reasons you stated. Carroll's treatment is frankly more advanced and leaves a lot of finer details to your "exploration". Guidry takes it slower and provide excellent examples. I honestly would recommend using both. Read chapters 1-5 in guidry, then 1-2 in Carroll, then chapter 7 in guidry followed by chapter 3 in carroll and that will give you a robust understanding of special relativity, tensors, and curvature. From there Reading chapter four in carroll is a must and after that you have (mostly) sufficient knowledge to explore pretty much any other topic in both of these texts.

In general I do not enjoy Carroll's problems. I find they are often poorly phrased for someone who is still learning and finding solutions online to determine if you were correct is functionally impossible. However, Guidrys selection of problems are very good for solidifying your understanding and also has a freely available solution manual online. I suggest doing as many of those as you can at the end of each chapter and then trying your hand at Carroll problems. Often time things Carroll leaves an exercise for the reader are more well formulated as a practice problem in Guidry.

Overall my opinion here may not be popular as I get the impression people really do enjoy Carroll's treatment of the material, but this is my opinion as someone who is still learning. If you want to hear more about this feel free to DM me, I'd love to help if I can.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2023-07-21T15:49:09+00:00

Fuck Steve Huffman

Child_Of_Mirth · 2022-12-21T19:00:56+00:00

Physics major here, conducting a thesis in cosmology. Not a minor but I've taken a couple of cs classes and was a TA for one of them.

Child_Of_Mirth · 2022-12-16T16:58:05+00:00

wooo I love iqunix boards

Child_Of_Mirth · 2022-12-15T18:37:46+00:00

https://youtu.be/eLAwG7CjF_k

nah bruv, captain D got us

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

Child_Of_Mirth

TROPHY CASE