@tobogganablaze My point is: How can you be so sure it has been dismissed? I just found about [1] from 2013.
It appears, the SM doesn't disagree with shrinkage at all.
But why does it seem your mind being blown by this idea? Maybe be because you didn't consider us being sucked in anywhere? If that's the case, here's why didn't you consider this yet: I didn't yet post my post despite the probability of not having a new thought.
That's how blocking path dependencies in science can be so strong.
"What instead of the universe expanding we’re just shrinking" is not what I posted because my brain didn't come up with it. If you want things simple and in your words, I suggest a solitary life.
Finally, you don't know my age or experience. Your unfriendliness could just have hurt a kid's interest into space. Remember that.
My point is: How can you be so sure it has been dismissed?
Models that don’t work should be dismissed. If you have a model for shrinkage that does work it should not be dismissed.
It appears, the SM doesn’t disagree with shrinkage at all.
Yup, pretty much.
But why does it seem your mind being blown by this idea? Maybe be because you didn’t consider us being sucked in anywhere? If that’s the case, here’s why didn’t you consider this yet: I didn’t yet post my post despite the probability of not having a new thought.
Sorry, I’m not following. My mind is definitly NOT blown and black holes don’t “suck in” things. That’s a common misconception. And I really don’t know what you’re trying to say with the sentences after that.
Your unfriendliness could just have hurt a kid’s interest into space. Remember that.
I’m sorry that you think I was unfriendly.
But this a community for people that smoked too much weed to saything dumb things that sound clever when you don’t think about them too much.
If there is actual kids around that are interested in space theneven more important that unscientific non-sense gets called out.
But the TL;DR here is that so far all “shrinking gravity” models had major flaws and didn’t work. And the last idea of perfeclty scaling atoms is unobservable, so really more of a thought expriment than an actual model.
We have a winner, #bookhistory.
The Book History Book Prize 2024 from the Society for the History of Authorship, Reading and Publishing, @sharporg , for books copyrighted 2023 goes to
The Rincewind stuff by #Pratchett does not get me, I am sorry. Managed my way through the series including/up to "Eric" and no, this one was the worst, I am done with Rincewind. Much too stereotypical, whimsy, uncapable and yet involuntarily funny Male of the 80ies.
Now will dive into the industrial revolution series, starting latest Friday with "Moving Pictures" :)!
Oh, and on paper I started to read The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret #Atwood [again, already read it in 2017] since there is The Testaments, its sequel that came out almost parallel to Trumps installment as POTUS, in 2017. The Testaments is requested by another library user and I have to give it back on the 22nd of June so I am in a bit of a hurry with those two, as I like it. 🥳 #bookstodon@bookstodon
I've finished the third and fourth entries of the saga.
In "The Farthest Shore" the magic is running out of the world; Ged and the prince of Enlad part in an adventure to find out what the problem is. It's a book full of adventure, visiting many Islands in the archipelago.
In contrast, "Tehanu" has a slower pace. It's a fantasy novel in which dragons and magic are not in the foreground. It answers the question How does the dispossessed, children, women, handicapped, live in a world with magic? And doing so makes you think about the power relations in the so called real world.
"Bullshit is 'any utterance produced where a speaker has indifference towards the truth of the utterance'. That explanation, in turn, is divided into two "species": hard bullshit, which occurs when there is an agenda to mislead, or soft bullshit, which is uttered without agenda.
"ChatGPT is at minimum a soft bullshitter or a bullshit machine, because if it is not an agent then it can neither hold any attitudes towards truth nor towards deceiving hearers about its (or, perhaps more properly, its users') agenda."
Greetings festive fellowship of the fediverse, it's the second day of the #SteamNextFest , and there are still many games to discover and discuss, let's share our mutual discoveries of today
You know, the answer to captions like that is to 99.9%:
Yes*
*Under laboratory conditions and for a very specific use case / a whole lot of money, once.
The reality is that billions are poured into developing faster computers and change is happening gradually, because low-hanging fruits are gathered even before they are ripe.