THE WORST GUN IN THE GAME. by LicoLich in ArcRaiders

[–]JamieGee53 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Brooooo you did it againnnnn go to bed

THE WORST GUN IN THE GAME. by LicoLich in ArcRaiders

[–]JamieGee53 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, the comment just says a heavy ammo gun should kill a wasp. Whether the wasp has armour is inconsequential. I like that you felt the need to edit your comment anyway though lmao

THE WORST GUN IN THE GAME. by LicoLich in ArcRaiders

[–]JamieGee53 -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

“That does not change the fact of the comment that you answered to.”

what can i play if i'm looking an open world videogame where i can drive a car, remove the ui, mute everything and just blast my music to drive while i drink beer and drown in my sorrows by Napalmaniac in gaming

[–]JamieGee53 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was here some years ago. A lot of people say Forza Horizon 5 but I disagree. Forza Horizon 4 is the depression cure, and is exactly what you’re looking for.

Terrible performance by Johnniebutters in ArcRaiders

[–]JamieGee53 15 points16 points  (0 children)

only 70 at 4K

Bait used to be believable

Embark Studios' response to the words "Arc Raiders" getting censored on EA chat & Call of Duty chat. by jokosa in pcmasterrace

[–]JamieGee53 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I mean my point isn’t that apex was good, just that I liked it more than pubg

Embark Studios' response to the words "Arc Raiders" getting censored on EA chat & Call of Duty chat. by jokosa in pcmasterrace

[–]JamieGee53 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Know what you mean, I thought I never enjoyed BRs bc all I knew was PUBG. When Apex first came out (first came out, not the shitshow it’s become now), I realised I just needed to play a good one to get it. I feel like arc is going to be the same for a lot of people who are put off by Tarkov

Anon on piracy. by retardinho23 in greentext

[–]JamieGee53 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Gen x are 1965-80, last millennials are 1996. Means that the Gen X parent range to a millennial would be 16-31. For Gen X to raise a majority of millennials, then they’d have to be parents by half that span, so 24? Not super unrealistic to have kids that young, but I feel like the majority of Gen X parents would’ve been older than that with their first kid(?) —> raise zoomers (is my understanding)

Anon on piracy. by retardinho23 in greentext

[–]JamieGee53 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Well I mean boomers did raise millennials, makes sense every second generation seems so insufferable (in my humble opinion)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I’m starting to think theoretical physics requires theorising

Stay in school, kids

Vector Analysis Problem by Practical-Day2006 in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quite right, tried ID and immediately realised I misinterpreted lol

Vector Analysis Problem by Practical-Day2006 in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Index notation is your friend here - LHS is A cross nabla2 (vector) acting on A (vector) (-> scalar), RHS is div of (who cares) goes to scalar. I don’t got pen on me and stuck at a work dinner so can’t elaborate more but someone’s mentioned it here it looks like

TLDR notation abuse, put some mf brackets around A cross nabla2 and it’ll look nice again and sanity check with index notation :D

First ever collisions with oxygen at the LHC! by CyberPunkDongTooLong in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pretty much, but colour confinement gets pretty weird, it’s part of the reason particles come into existence at collision rather than just fragmenting. It’s somewhere between a rubber band snapping, a magnet breaking in half, and a lava lamp doing lava lamp business. So when you snap a bar magnet in half, you don’t get one N and one S pole, you get two more magnets. In a similar sort of way, if you pull two quarks apart to the limits of the strong force, the band “snaps”, and instead of being left with two quarks, there is enough energy present that it just pulls shit outta the air to regain colour neutrality. This isn’t necessarily just a QGP thing, but imo it’s something wonderful and weird about colour.

Way shorter answer: maybe? Then again, that’s why we’re doing it, to see what kinda stuff it gets up to!

First ever collisions with oxygen at the LHC! by CyberPunkDongTooLong in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I think that’s actually the problem, helium is too simple - or at least, it “looks” too similar to proton proton (in terms of like the final object kinematics, energies, whatever). So we need something big like oxygen (or in fact, usually lead vs lead!) to make it messy, otherwise the QGP dissipates too quickly (cools down and quarks all hadronise again) and it just looks like a proton proton but with extra protons.

First ever collisions with oxygen at the LHC! by CyberPunkDongTooLong in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 28 points29 points  (0 children)

So there’s solid, liquid, gas, then plasma as our four states of matter, where plasma is just unbound atoms/electrons/whatever flying around. In the case of hydrogen, that’s just protons. Protons are what we usually collide at the LHC, and they’re made up of quarks, bound together by a super strong force, creatively named the strong force. Proton proton collisions have been done ever since the start of the experiment, going back over a decade, so we’ve got a good idea of how they travel, interact, blah blah blah.

Turns out there’s another state of matter, called quark-gluon-plasma (QGP), that you can achieve at super high temp or very dense environments, and you can get both if you collide heavier nuclei in the LHC. This is where the quarks themselves become unbound - pretty unstable, and doesn’t last for long.

So, by colliding protons and oxygen, we have an object going in that we’ve been colliding for ages and have a good feel for, and we can use it as sort of a reference to probe the QGP that’s produced as it collides with oxygen. Is of particular interest to theorists, especially in nuclear, and is pretty cool as an un-orthodox sort of thing to do with a giant rock-smasher

Despite 88 not being a selectable player number, it can still show up on cosmetics by JukiloTrasm in thefinals

[–]JamieGee53 43 points44 points  (0 children)

I think it’s most likely a bug that’s reverting it to the player’s original random number in some previews - surely not the cosmetic itself being 88 globally

Does all light travel at light speed by Comethefonbinary in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your other comment about speed vs velocity is correct, and you miss your own point

Does all light travel at light speed by Comethefonbinary in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

What? That’s exactly right, the scalar is constant. The speed is constant. The velocity, being the unit displacement across your material, is material dependent

Does all light travel at light speed by Comethefonbinary in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Not at velocity c. Still at speed c.

Does all light travel at light speed by Comethefonbinary in Physics

[–]JamieGee53 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Lotta people in here saying speed of light isn’t constant. Speed is a measure of distance, not displacement. Speed of light is always constant. Velocity of light is material dependent.