The scientific method answers “How?” questions. It lets us build models of reality - a map of the territory.
“Why?” questions imply intent- requiring an intelligence making a decision. The scientific method does not and cannot answer those questions.
Potato soup is just mashed potatoes with too much water, fight me.
Fierce independence is how we got into this mess, and allows exploitation by organized power-hungry groups.
People need to cooperate in egalitarian collectives to achieve goals and resist exploitation.
Boss made a dollar
I made a dime
That was a poem
From a simpler time.
Now boss makes a thousand
And gives us a cent
While he’s got employees
Who can’t pay the rent.
When boss makes a million
And the workers make jack
That’s when we strike
And take our lives back.
“It’s like he’s threatenin’ me or somthin’.”
How do they taste? I haven’t gotten to try one yet.
I have had Gros Michel bananas. They do not taste like banana candy, although weirdly they do smell like the candy much more strongly than the Cavendish.
The replacement for the Cavendish is already being sold commercially in Australia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfinger_banana
It’s more complicated in ways that aren’t intuitive.
Yes, at first glance, it appears that everything would continue to collapse down to a singularity. But a singularity is literally a failure of our model of physics. It’s like dividing by zero- the result is nonsense. It’s not an actual object.
From our perspective, time is stopped at the event horizon of a black hole. The singularity never forms because there isn’t time for that to happen. If you fell into a black hole, would a singularity form as you are crossing the event-horizon? Maybe. Maybe Hawking Radiation is a thing and you’re cooked by a wall of radiation as the collapsing object literally evaporates beneath you.
Keep in mind that high densities are needed for stellar black holes to form. An event horizon would form around the solar system if it was filled with air- and yes, there are black holes of this size.
I think it’s a combination of at least three things.
Cosmic Microwave Background radiation gives us a pretty good idea of the energy/mass density in the universe at a fixed point and age of the universe. If you take the densities estimated from the CMB and multiply it by the estimated size of the universe at the time the CMB (380k years after the Big Bang), then you get the total mass.
Second, we can just look for what we can see. I think there have been large-scale surveys done to estimate total mass/energy in the universe.
The third estimate has to do with something called ‘critical mass’ - we observe the overall ‘curve’ of space to be very close to flat. I’m talking the geometry of space; two parallel rays of light do not ever cross or diverge. For this to happen, there needs to be a certain average density of mass.
Wikipedia has the mass of the observable universe listed as 1.5×10^53 kg, although this can go up to 10^60 kg at the higher ends.
If we plug the Wikipedia numbers into the Schwartzchild radius formula: r = (2GM) / (c^2)
Where G is the gravitational constant, M is our mass, and c is the speed of light:
r = (2 * 6.67408 * 10^-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 * 1.5*10^53 kg) / (299792458 m/s)^2
r = 2 * 10^43 m^3 s^-2 / 8.988 * 10^16 m2/s2
r = 2.225×10^26 meters
r = 23.52 billion light years
Wikipedia lists the radius of the observable universe as 46.5 billion light years.
So… given the Wikipedia numbers, the universe would need to be half the size it is now to be a black hole. At these scales, being within an order of magnitude is… fine.
If we bump up the estimate of mass to only 3x10^53 kg, then the Schwartzchild radius equals the size of the observable universe.
So it’s within the margins of error of our current estimates that the Schwartzchild radius of our universe would be the current size of our universe.
If you take all the mass in our universe and run it through the Schwarzschild equation, you get a black hole with about the same radius as our observable universe.
Things don’t need to be tightly packed to be a black hole, there just needs to be enough stuff in an area.
What’s so funny about Biggus Dickus?
deleted by creator
Co-lying is mentioned, but it isn’t the subject of the paper linked.
“Make Congress Work Again”
This is going to require good branding and simplified explanations.
What we have going for us is that basically everyone agrees that Congress isn’t functional.
You need a small list of very focused demands. Occupy Wall Street and BLM failed because they started tacking on too many things.
Here are demands that will fix the core issues at the federal level:
These five items must be implemented if our democracy is to survive. Everything else can be handled after.
I’m not trying to start a fight here.
Your comments come off as someone who is naive to how bad many families are to the point of having a disneyfied view of family.
I’m really glad your personal experience has been great, but please know that is not as common as you think.
Don’t touch the poop