Xavienth

Quebec swear words are almost all Catholicism-derived. The Tabernacle, the Host, the Chalice, the Virgin, etc.

Of course, that would never change in the face of changing financial incentives. The world as it is is the world as it ought to be.

I had one professor who could tell almost any calculator model from 30 feet away. Other than him I never had any professor care about the specific model of calculator during an examination.

It’s not so much the force that is important, regardless of if it’s normalized for body size, it’s the pressure that does damage. psi (or Pa in SI) is the appropriate unit.

We needed to get this shit done 10 years ago. Any delay in removing all fossil fuel emissions now is just a matter of how bad we want climate change to get, rather than preventing it. Net zero by 2050 is a fucking eternity away and is a shit goal, and all the projections that get us on track to 1.5 °C of warming have us extensively using carbon capture which is entirely unrealistic.

Existing nuclear plants in France work, they can load follow to some degree, and renewables can make up the difference with minimal energy storage. But at a certain point you have to stop investing in renewables if you have minimal energy storage and your electricity solution is working.

I am going to emphasize that last part: IF you can’t get enough energy storage, and IF your energy mix is fine, you must stop investment in renewable installations. Without enough storage, the baseload+peak paradigm works, you just have to regulate it.

Just in case you confuse him for all the other heads of state named Putin. There’s hundreds of em /s

The logical structure doesn’t hold. People don’t eat meat for profit, they eat it for preference. You can’t ask slave owners to be slightly less profit-seeking. You can ask people to tolerate small sacrifices like eating less meat.

Whatever the case, individual solutions to structural problems are not and have never worked, it’s a capitalist lie. I intentionally said “ask people to tolerate small sacrifices” instead of “make small sacrifices”. A reduction in meat consumption has to be imposed, whether at the distributor or the supplier.

It is the quadratic formula. It already is the solution. The problem is any quadratic of the form ax²+bx+c=0

Have people never heard of the quiet game outside of an Australian cartoon?

I’m not clear on the details but I think some servers just hook up open loop to mains water for cooling.

Which would conversely strengthen the idea that wolves hunt in packs due to the difficulty of hunting.

But wait, if a lone wolf gets 53% of the moose, but a pack of six gets 83% of the moose, then per-wolf that’s 13.8% of the moose. Why would an individual opt to hunt in a pack then?

Typo?

It’s a person by person thing and I suspect age plays a large part in feelings towards the term. In general I would say avoid the term unless it is requested.

The most Linux response. Linux doesn’t fit your use case? Clearly your use case is wrong! /s

A successful organism would not have evolved to highly express cortisol to weed itself out in the case that it has a stressful life. It makes no sense for an organism to evolve a trait that makes it at best equally likely and at worst less likely to reproduce.

The reason we release excess cortisol in modern life is because our bodies did not evolve for constantly present stressors, they evolved to be stressed in a situation, run away from the tiger, and then you’re good.

Seems like that should actually be quite a useful task in the Netherlands considering all the polders!

It’s less the result of a sensible system of units (like how 1 L of water ideally weighs 1 kg), and more fortunate happenstance in this case.

The formula for hydrostatic pressure* is:

∆P= ρ·g·∆h

where ∆P is the difference in pressure across the difference in height ∆h, ρ is the density of the liquid (~1000 kg/m³ for water, slightly more for sea water), and g is the acceleration due to gravity.

So the reason it works out nicely is because g is a little bit less than a nice factor of ten (9.8 m/s²), and the density of sea water is a little bit more than a nice factor of ten (typically 1025 kg/m³), and 1 atm also happens to be almost a nice factor of ten (101,325 Pa). That’s why the difference between the approximation and the actual* is less than a percent.

*This assumes a constant density of the liquid, which for water is reasonable, however different depths can have different salinities and temperatures in layers which change the density by less than a percent. Additionally, this assumes a constant acceleration due to gravity. At depth, the acceleration due to gravity can be higher, but this also has an effect that amounts to less than a percent even at the deepest point in the ocean.

It’s 6 fathoms deep not 5 fathoms where you’re experiencing two atmospheres, and that’s absolute not gauge, so 1 atm higher than ambient.