Humans are very picky. Must have certain amount of gravity, need to see green stuff, can’t handle radiation etc. it’s is as if they were built to be on a specific planet and nowhere else.
Hamartiogonic
joined 2 years ago
Last time I had a sore throat, I drank a lot of hibiscus (sort of like tea, but not even close). Obviously, I still had to fuel my caffeine addiction so I did have my usual coffee too, but most of the time I had a warm cup of hibiscus with me. Whatever you end up drinking, make sure it isn’t too hot, because that’s going to make everything worse. Hibiscus appeared to work just fine for me.
Business as usual, just another day at the lab. People using actual real world samples instead of the expensive standards to produce a very messy calibration squiggle. Also, the machine probably requires some maintenance from time to time.
Then there’s also the flat-earther style: “We applied a flawed model and flawed methodology to standard circumstances and got the results we wanted!”
I guess we need a new comic to address all the different kinds of pseudo-science.
The universe seems pretty infinite when viewed with our current tools and from our perspective. I would still argue that we can’t really be sure just yet. However, we can say it’s effectively infinite just like a lot of things in physics are effectively massless, effectively frictionless etc. You totally can make your calculations work really well even though your model cuts some corners here and there.
In many cases, you can even assume the Earth is flat and simple maths still works well enough. However, when you zoom out and start doing more complex calculations, you run into trouble and need to upgrade to a more sophisticated model. I would argue that the current assumption of the universe being infinite can fall into the same category.
If we can’t find the cosmic frame of reference, then how do we know it even exists? Sure, you can assume it exists, and call that a hypothesis. If only someone had a way to test that hypothesis.
Good point. Sounds like it would be a good idea to replace the RNG chip with a weather station. This way, sunshine, wind, rain, temperature and other conditions control the frequency of the motor. Anyone who can predict that deserves a Nobel Price.
Add a long pipe labyrinth so narrow it will cause turbulence and loose an unpredictable amount of energy that way. The mathematician who can predict how that mess works out gets a noble prize and a pack of drill bits.
Build a bund wall, and throw a pump in there as well. Then, just pump the liquid back into the tank to keep it full at all times. In order to deter mathematically inclined terrorists, use a variable frequency drive and make that frequency change every second. The problem becomes unsolvable.
There are other options too. You could fill the tank with tar, any really thick slurry, molten sodium, hydrogen sulfide, 2-mercaptoethanol, propane just to name a few. Drill into a tank like that and you’ll regret that decision instantly.
The idea of modern medicine is to sell chemical compounds that actually have an effect. It’s a philosophical and ethical thing. All products have a unique psychological effect that gets intertwined with their biochemical effect. If you can’t study them individually, it’s impossible to tell if the biochemical effect even exists at all. If your medicine relies heavily, or even entirely, on the psychological side, it’s no different than homeopathy. The idea of modern medicine is to be better than the old stuff that preceded it.
I prefer to think of this as an equation like this: Pm+Bm=Pp+Bp
Pm=psychological effect, medicine
Bm=biochemical effect, medicine
Pp=psychological effect, placebo = surprisingly big
Bp=biochemical effect, placebo = 0
If these sides are equivalent, the medicine is just as effective as placebo. If the medicine side is bigger, you’ll want to know how much of it comes from the P and B terms. In order to figure that out, you would need to know some values. Normally, you can just assume that Pm=Pp, but if you can’t assume that, it you’re left with two unknowns in that equation. In this case, you really can’t assume them to be equal, which means that your data won’t allow you to figure out how much of the total effect comes from psychological and biochemical effects. It could be 50/50, 10/90, who knows. That sort of uncertainty is a serious problem, because of the philosophical and ethical side of developing medicine.
I think we could send robot farmers there to grow some food for the people living in orbit. Maybe low-G carrots could be nicer than the ones grown on earth.