AbouBenAdhem

u/AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
61 posts · 2.9k comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

It sounds like the key theorist that convinced you of this is Jeffrey Bub.

Has Bub himself implied that his criticism of Frauchiger and Renner’s conclusion contradicts special relativity?

“It’s not priced in by the markets,” BlackRock’s Louise Kooy-Henckel said at an event in Hong Kong on Monday. “But it is potentially also the chronic risks where institutional capital can come in because of the investment horizon.”

Does institutional capital price in the risk of scenarios in which the institutions cease to exist?

The Mercator map, which has been in common use since the 16th Century, has come in for criticism as it shows Africa as similar in size to Greenland, even though it is 14 times larger.
Critics say this leads to the development needs and potential for countries near the equator to be minimised.

I think that’s got more to do with the systemic legacy of colonialism than with which world maps people look at.

That’s how I understand it: the volume element surrounding any given point has to be contracting, but it can expand in some direction(s) if it has at least one other direction to contract in for compensation.

As for qualitative differences, I'm not really picturing what the difference would be—but trying to intuit the effect of extra parametric dimensions might be like trying to explain trichromancy to a color-blind person.

I think you’d immediately collapse into a shrivelled-up ball of super-dense matter.

The Pauli exclusion principle keeps particles like electrons from occupying the same physical space, which is what makes them take up volume and gives atoms and molecules their size. If they were free to move in an extra spatial dimension, they could pack much closer together, and their volume would collapse.

Focus on boosting comments instead of sheer volume of posts—people post specifically because they want answers, and seeing a long stream of posts with no responses makes them think it's not worth bothering.

I think people's familiarity with the r/askhistorians subreddit may be discouraging anyone without graduate-level academic experience from responding, but the subreddit didn't start out requiring that level of rigor—it became more selective as the volume of replies increased. But for here, even a general-knowledge reply can encourage clarifying comments from more-informed people who may otherwise doubt their qualifications.