thefatone

I haven't heard that people pay to be on his show, if that's true that certainly changes things in my mind.

100% Love it!

Thanks for your response. Are you suggesting that indecisive movement on the part of the media is what causes antivax sentiments to rise? I mean one of the biggest slurs they throw is that you're antivax. I can't remember a time when antivaxing was talked about on the media as a reasonable standpoint. Yet the prevalence of antivax sentiments is increasing. Couldn't it also be attributable to institutional decline?

Did the CDC behave in a consistent and transparent way during covid? Or did they issue contradictory recommendations, and disinformation regarding lab leak. My point only is, if our institutions weren't failing us on the reg, maybe we'd find it easier to take their word for things.

True, there are limits to freedom of speech. But aren't you disturbed by the control that people in society are exerting on the narratives that we are allowed to question? With or without government involvement. I'm talking about big techmedia here, and the power they have to set the narrative entirely with or without the government involved. I mean the tools that they put into play to stop right wing misinformation (not saying most of it isn't misinformation) can be just flipped over on the left when the left starts threatening institutions down the road.

Came in to go to bed and I saw this article. I saw 3 separate shooting stars tonight and had no idea there was something happening. So cool, and so lucky I was outside tonight.

Ignoring some slight complications, the speed of light is consistent everywhere. If light always travels at the same speed, we can begin telling distance in terms of how long the light has had to propagate.

An analogy may be the following: Let's say you get in your car. For simplicities sake, we'll say that the car can ONLY DRIVE 60 km per hour (Analagous to the single speed of light). Because we know what speed you are traveling, in km/hr, we can talk about how far you are going in terms of only time. For example, you get into your car and drive for 2 minutes (60km/60 minutes * 2 minutes). In this case the minutes cancel our (minutes/minutes =1) and we are left with 2km. We can either say "You have driven for 2 km" or we can say " you have driven for 2 car minutes".

In this example, it makes no sense why we would want to say that you traveled 2 car minutes rather than simply saying you traveled 2km. We have a very good concept of what 2km looks like in our brains.

The speed of light is around 3,000,000km/second. The scale of that is beyond what easily fits into our heads as humans (try to imagine a group ten people standing in front of you. Now try imagining how many of those groups would be required to have 1 million people standing in front of you. It's possible, but not easy). Instead of fucking around with numbers that we can't easily conceptualize like 24,000,000 km between the earth and the sun, it's much easier to reduce that to a more managable chunk of information. It takes light from the sun 8 minutes to reach the earth. Is 24,000,000 easier to conceptualize, or is it easier to say that it crosses a distance of 8 times the distance light can traverse in a second (8 light seconds )

I'm not really satisfied with this explanation, it's not really ELI5 material. If it helps, good. If it doesn't keep poking at me.

Strangely LD seems to me to be THE MOST CATCHY Star Trek theme. Every time I hear it it's playing in my head for the next 24 hours. Not saying it's the best, it's great, but goddamn does it burrow its way into my brain