If you're interested in creating time dilation, then a planetary mass black hole unfortunately won't get you any further than, well, a regular planet with the same mass.
(Aside: time dilation already occurs on and around Earth. GPS satellites have to account for the fact that time runs ever so slightly slower on the ground.)
So, it’s not the local strength of the gravitational field, but the overall mass that matters? How does that work? I mean, if distance/ intensity doesn’t matter, than distance is irrelevant? That seems extremely counterintuitive.
I thought that since you could get into areas where the field was arbitrarily intense, that it would be able to provoke significant relativistic effects.
I had assumed that the small mass would make tidal forces more problematic than with a larger one, but if the distance/intensity of the field isn’t a factor, but only the overall mass… wouldn’t that mean that we could utilize black holes at arbitrarily long distance to provoke those effects, so it would just be a universal constant based on the mass of the universe, and there would be no relativistic effects on a relative basis?
I don't think that's right except at a radius of a typical planet. At the event horizon of even a planetary mass black hole, gravity is so strong that light cant escape, and the time dilation effect should be the same as for any event horizon.
Eh, you’re giving technology too much credit and not considering what biology has developed to do naturally and far more efficiently. It’s also postulated that computational technology is nearing its current limits. Humanity’s hubris around technology is going to be our downfall, like how we think we can “stop” climate change with theorized technology even after we let the climate go too far into the red. We are greatly overestimating and exaggerating what tech can do.
DDG’s bot’s summary of the linked article and one other:
“The computational power of the human brain is often estimated in floating-point operations per second (FLOPS), with estimates ranging from 10^12 to 10^28 FLOPS, depending on the level of detail considered. In comparison, modern supercomputers can perform up to several hundred petaflops, but the brain is believed to operate at a similar or even higher efficiency due to its unique structure and processing capabilities.”
No idea how they got 10^28. There are only 10^11 neurons and their firing rate is 2*10^2. Even if you assume they do fp16 accumulation (which I doubt, it is unlikely they are that precise), that adds maybe 10^5 to the total of 2*10^18. That's a very optimistic estimate.
The amount MAGA apologists spouting off bs on HN in the last 2 years has been disappointing. I've been on HN for about 8 years now and lately the pervasive brain rot has made a home even here. Truly disappointing.
It's not brain rot, it's populist messaging doing what it does. Trump built a foundation in people's minds on emotional appeals. He drew a picture of a country under attack, and one only He can reverse course on. Through careful messaging and constantly appealing to the lowest common denominator, He has made himself a God. And, as such, his supporters are nothing more than believers. What they lack in evidence or reasoning they more than make up for in blind faith.
Sure but how is blindly following an ignorant buffoon not a clear indication of brain rot? You'd expect people would be more able to see through his constant lying, severe ineptitude and other bs but apparently there is no use of critical thinking going on within his cult
It's also a good way to turn the 50 states into a collection of poor vs well-off locations, where being born into one means you are possibly trapped there due to having no money to leave. That plan invites the poorest states to simply fall apart - and like what's already happening: invites the richer states to pick up the burden of paying for states with bad (usually republican) economic policies.
To be fair, most cities are run by Dems. They do not do a good job, and that's only partially because they have to foot the bill of disastrously expensive suburbs.
Living in Canada gives access to universal healthcare that won't bankrupt you if you need medical help, whereas in the US getting sick can financially collapse everything you've worked for - all so some CEO can have their yacht. Chances are also significantly higher in the US that you will be shot dead in a grocery store or movie theater.
Maybe it's because I've lived in Canada for 4+ decades now, but I wouldn't exactly call what we have access to universal healthcare. It's hard to find a family doctor, if you do find a family doctor, whether you can get reasonable appointment access, is highly dependent on the doctor and not always available. If you do get an appointment and you need to see a specialist or other service that needs a referral you often face a substantial wait list. It's nothing like what it was in the 80's and 90's where appointments were always easily same day or next day and wait lists were short or non existent. To me this is just broken in the opposite way that america's system is broken.
Also, the gun thing makes me think people don't understand statistics. The number of gun related deaths in the usa was 14.6 per 100k people in 2021 and around 0.5 per 100k in Canada, so yes it's drastically higher in the usa but that ignores that 60% of those are suicides and it ignores the highly geographically concentrated nature of the problem.You avoid a handful of neighborhoods and think happy thoughts and your gun death risk basically disappears. unadjusted its a ~1% risk over an 80 year lifetime in the USA vs 0.04% in canada. When you take into account reality and realize you aren't suicidal and you aren't going to visit or live in that tiny handful of extremely high risk neighborhoods the USA risk also drops to almost zero, even over a lifetime.
Not saying this is true, but the amount of time and effort put into saying "no one is listening to you" could be attributed to the novel 1984, where the government is actively listening to its citizens. Enough people could associate the novel with government surveillance that it's what people interpret as the most likely surveillance happening - and enough people don't understand tech that it's lost on them that a) the tech to actively listen to millions of people constantly doesn't exist at the appropriate level to be effective b) there are significantly more and far more effective ways to monitor people with current tech than via microphone. It's truly unfortunate people don't understand tech to realize what's actually possible and what is actively happening vs what they imagine could be happening
Download OtterAI. Or run voice memos all day, load it into NotebookLM and it about your day. Hell, setup whisper on your MacBook and you can chug away at pretty significant quantities of audio.
I’ve seen solutions that process audio from hundreds of multi-party meetings and can do all sorts of analysis. In one case, it can do realtime sentiment analysis and alert security when an encounter is getting tense.
Kind of expected this. As soon as more peer review starts on any astronomy claim big enough to be published in the NYT usually the initial claim slowly gets dismantled.
There are unsupported hypotheses I tell my coworkers and linkbait articles published in mainstream news. There must be a balance to allow new ideas but don't burn the science reputation.
