|
Count Roland posted:They are significant though. Metal content affects the life cycle of stars for one thing. I mean, sure, but also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_the_chemical_elements#Universe posted:Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the Universe; helium is second. [...]
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Canada's got 1/10the population and cases are only split by province in can, vs county in the states. But yeah, even if they granularized it it'd still be pretty Woah. It'd be far better to show cases per capita Outrail has a new favorite as of 17:16 on Oct 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
In the replies she points out that the total cases in Canada is the same as the death toll in the US lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
Hurt Whitey Maybe posted:In the replies she points out that the total cases in Canada is the same as the death toll in the US lmao Jfc, even divided by 10 that's... Pretty hosed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Canada's got 1/10the population and cases are only split by province in can, vs county in the states. But yeah, even if they granularized it it'd still be pretty Woah. She does have a point though, the US's approach has been abysmal. Up here in Canada the various governments did lockdowns while the feds handed out income supports and things were much better. Then they stopped, and now kids are going back to school, and things are looking not great.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:25
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
I mean yes, Canada has been much better; however it's really dumb to use this map to say "there's a straight line". It's obvious that Canada's figures are per-province, whereas the US's are much more granular, probably per-county.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
Even if Canada’s bubbles were placed more locally, the map wouldn’t look all that different because the population is so concentrated near the U.S. border, and much of it south of the forty‐ninth parallel in the east.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:32
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Canada's got 1/10the population and cases are only split by province in can, vs county in the states. But yeah, even if they granularized it it'd still be pretty Woah. The non coastal areas of the us that border Canada aren't exactly rife with millions
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:The non coastal areas of the us that border Canada aren't exactly rife with millions The Detroit area has a population of something like 3 or 4 million, and Buffalo adds another million on top of that. Are you perhaps including the Great Lakes area in "coastal"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:24
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:The Detroit area has a population of something like 3 or 4 million, and Buffalo adds another million on top of that. Are you perhaps including the Great Lakes area in "coastal"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
Apparently this isn't even a joke: https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/M/Metals
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Apparently this isn't even a joke: When 99.87% of the nuclei in the universe (by number, not mass) are either hydrogen or helium, it does become useful to have a one-word catch-all term for "elements that aren't hydrogen or helium." We do occasionally care about what specific elements we're talking about, but often they're all lumped together, such as when talking about the "metallicity" of a star - the concentration of elements that aren't hydrogen or helium, which is usually expressed as a mass fraction, and is a pretty useful number for predicting how a star evolves over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 00:09
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:The Detroit area has a population of something like 3 or 4 million, and Buffalo adds another million on top of that. Are you perhaps including the Great Lakes area in "coastal"? Yes. I'm referring to the fact that that map showed piles of cases in like... North Dakota
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:Yes. I'm referring to the fact that that map showed piles of cases in like... North Dakota On a per capita basis they're in pretty bad shape.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 02:03
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:this is not awful or funny. this is a good and useful periodic table. My point in posting it was “don’t let astronomers define ‘metal’ for you, and don’t let topologists define ‘hole’.”  The awfulness here is that the key doesn’t say that grey elements must be created artificially.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 02:18
|
|
|
Well they're listing elements by their extraterrestrial origins, but yeah you still need to say where technetium and prometheum come from if you're going to include them. Including the transuranic elements would let you have another category that they could be lumped in with. Also, both of them can exist in nature
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 02:26
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:My point in posting it was “don’t let astronomers define ‘metal’ for you Same for "order of magnitude". I grew up as an astronomy nerd. Ask me about getting into an argument with my sixth-grade math teacher about whether an order of magnitude was a factor of 10 or 2.5.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
If you try to stick me with those chudly fuckers in Albert and Saskatchewan we'll secede to
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:13
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Same for "order of magnitude". Why tf would it be 2.5? ive never even heard of that before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:15
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:25
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Why tf would it be 2.5? ive never even heard of that before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_magnitude
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:36
|
|
|
FINE, the fifth root of 100, sue me. Outrail posted:Why tf would it be 2.5? ive never even heard of that before. It's purely historical, but it has its uses. For thousands of years, the stars have been grouped into categories, the brightest ones being "of the first magnitude", the next brightest the "second magnitude", all the way down to sixth, which are around the dimmest that can be seen with the naked eye. Sometime in the 1800s, as measurements got more precise, they fit a curve to this rough categorization, and found that the fifth root of 100, or about a factor of 2.5 between magnitudes, fit very well. You can also extend this curve from both sides, so you can say that Pluto is something like magnitude 13 or 14 and the Sun is magnitude -27.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:38
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Why tf would it be 2.5? ive never even heard of that before. Stars were divided into tiers of brightness in classical antiquity. In the nineteenth century we were able to quantify stellar brightness, and it turns out that there was approximately a factor of one hundred difference between stars long placed in the first tier like Vega and stars of the sixth, barely visible to the unaided eye. To divide that into the intermediate tiers, use the fifth root of one hundred, which is 2.5118864315…
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:40
|
|
|
Buncha starlords itt
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 03:45
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Buncha starlords itt We're everywhere. Quietly listening, biding our time, waiting for the opportunity to leap out and explain exactly what a parsec is and why it's useful, or relate the anecdote that the discoverer of the planet Uranus wanted to name it George, or tell the cautionary tale of how Galileo actually recorded an observation of Neptune over 200 years before it was discovered, but never bothered to follow up on his note about that one odd star that might have moved a little between nights, or-- Anyway, space stuff. It's cool. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 04:06
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:My point in posting it was “don’t let astronomers define ‘metal’ for you, and don’t let topologists define ‘hole’.” Is it literally not possible for stars to produce trans-Uranics or do they just not stick around long enough to matter on astronomical time scales? E: hmm apparently the answer is yes, this star is jammed up with them https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przybylski%27s_Star PittTheElder has a new favorite as of 07:02 on Oct 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 06:55
|
|
|
Transuranics are very unstable, doubly so in the presence of a neutron flux, i.e. a star. Te and Po have no known stable isotopes (but with a half-life way shorter than say Uranium, also) iirc, so they don't appear as produced from fusion phenomena. Basically for star produced matter, you can think of it as a bell curve roughly centered around Fe, for what stars like to poop out as solid matter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 07:00
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:We're everywhere. Quietly listening, biding our time, waiting for the opportunity to leap out and explain exactly what a parsec is and why it's useful, or relate the anecdote that the discoverer of the planet Uranus wanted to name it George, or tell the cautionary tale of how Galileo actually recorded an observation of Neptune over 200 years before it was discovered, but never bothered to follow up on his note about that one odd star that might have moved a little between nights, or-- No one would have believed, in the first years of the twenty-first century, that this world was being watched keenly and closely...
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 14:03
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:We're everywhere. Quietly listening, biding our time, waiting for the opportunity to leap out and explain exactly what a parsec is and why it's useful, or relate the anecdote that the discoverer of the planet Uranus wanted to name it George, or tell the cautionary tale of how Galileo actually recorded an observation of Neptune over 200 years before it was discovered, but never bothered to follow up on his note about that one odd star that might have moved a little between nights, or-- Can i ask a dumb space question? So a few years ago there were all those pop-sci reports about hwo Betelgeuse is gonna go supernova soon (in space terms) and would be the third brightest object in the sky - sun, moon, then betelgeuse. But there was also some, I swear, that said it would be comparable in size, from our perspective. Which sounds bonkers, but the sizes involved are so bonkers already I have no idea if its even remotely plausible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 14:22
|
|
|
Strom Cuzewon posted:Can i ask a dumb space question? I don't know if the size is impossible, but it would take time. It would start as a bright point and then expand over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
Strom Cuzewon posted:So a few years ago there were all those pop-sci reports about hwo Betelgeuse is gonna go supernova soon (in space terms) and would be the third brightest object in the sky - sun, moon, then betelgeuse. Nah. Betelgeuse is about 600 light years away, something at that distance which had an angular diameter the same as the sun would have to be light-years in diameter and supernovas sure don't do that. I mean, there'll be a nebula left over after the explosion and in time that will expand to that size, but that takes tens to hundreds of years (the Crab Nebula is about 11 light-years across and came from a supernova in 1054.) A Betelgeuse supernova would be very bright, but still just a point. Phanatic has a new favorite as of 16:55 on Oct 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
My highschool trig says it'd need to be 3 light years across, which seems unfeasible. Edit: Just seen Phanatics post. drat, but I was really hoping it was true. Still, nebula are lovely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
I'm also gonna show my ignorance and ask if a parsex is a real measure of time/distance/space time. I'm just too lazy to google it and would like a comedy answer. E: Lol, not gonna edit that one out
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:09
|
|
|
Outrail posted:I'm also gonna show my ignorance and ask if a parsex is a real measure of time/distance/space time. I'm just too lazy to google it and would like a comedy answer. Yes, according to the well-known space documentary Star Wars, a parsec is a unit of time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:11
|
|
|
Outrail posted:I'm also gonna show my ignorance and ask if a parsex is a real measure of time/distance/space time. I'm just too lazy to google it and would like a comedy answer. I don't have a comedy answer, but a parsec is a real unit of distance. It's short for parallax (arc)second, and it's the distance away where the parallax of an object (the change in the angle as the earth moves to opposite sides of the sun) is 1 arcsecond. It's about 3.3 lightyears. Addition during preview: Yeah, that's a good comedy answer above.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
I liked the fan theory that Han Solo was hustling dumb moisture farmers. The con man measures his mark so he can bilk them better. Disney killed that theory, but gently caress Disney.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Yes, according to the well-known space documentary Star Wars, a parsec is a unit of time. It's more plausible than most of 2020 so I'm not 100% convinced Lucas isn't some kind of parsexual interstellar timelord/director.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
a parsex is the amount of time needed for a proficient sex-haver to complete a hole of sex.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
if every ship moves at the same speed in hyperspace, then charting a fast course must mean charting a short course, and people with a better computer or higher appetite for risk could make a shorter course that cuts closer to navigational hazards (planets, stars, etc)
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 17:24
|
|
