38
What have you learned recently? Which rabbit hole have you been digging into?
(discuss.tchncs.de)
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
38 points (97.5% liked)
Casual Conversation
2255 readers
434 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The best scientists don’t understand the observations whatsoever. They have some theories they cobbled together to fit the observations, but pretty much no real world evidence to back up the basis of those theories (not sure if I worded that one well). Good example is dark matter. That’s not a thing we know of at all. That’s a made up idea they created to make some math work, because they absolutely cannot account for how much matter in the universe the math says we are supposed to have. In other words, the math says things like gravity just don’t work unless there is a LOT more matter in the universe than what we are able to observe (I might be wrong about the gravity example. I have not read up on this in a while.)
Gravity is becoming almost a personal vice for me, and i know i am risking to be seen as ridiculous for even saying so.
Supposedly its one if the fundamental forces, but fundamental in this context means forces not reducable to more “basic” interactions.
But we already know that gravity is caused by curvatures in spacetime. Which we believe are caused by mass.
“Spacetime” is not classified as a fundamental force.
I have personally (internally) started to use the term “gravity effect” because it fits my own model of the universe much better.
My own model of the universe is by all accounts some dumb ape bs, but as i am coming to terms with, so is most of established human knowledge.
I have real fears of one day finding myself on the side of science deniers, but a freaking love science…
Dude, you can’t lead up to a theory like that and then no payoff!