JayDee

joined 5 months ago
[–] JayDee 6 points 14 hours ago

Ah that makes sense.

[–] JayDee 10 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

Are you suggesting making it explode? Cuz you've still got local witnesses to interrogate, security footage from the surrounding area, cellular telemetry data of area, depending. That'd mostly just raise the stakes for you, going from a disturbing the peace charge to a potential terrorism charge.

[–] JayDee 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Goddamn, what a fun setup. Fires 9mm, right?

Doesn't look like you've added sling points to it yet. Where'd you get the stock for it?

[–] JayDee 39 points 16 hours ago (8 children)

That's pretty damn interesting. I imagine it'd take a couple days for it to be tracked down and a few more to be traced back to the maker.

[–] JayDee 8 points 16 hours ago

I agree that this should be cracked down on when reported or discovered.

I imagine it wouldn't be hard to find users doing this by just crunching upvote data, but that kind of data analysis might get pretty cumbersome for larger instances.

[–] JayDee 6 points 16 hours ago

The witch stalks them for days, picks them off when alone, and at the climax of the film ambushes them in the abandoned house. I'd say that counts as a persistent ambush predator.

[–] JayDee 6 points 16 hours ago

I'd say that a witch creature which stalks trespassing videographers counts as an indigenous predatorial species of a local ecosystem.

[–] JayDee 46 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (6 children)

Bruh, what cherry picking. Literally in the exact same movie you have velociraptors stalking prey in groups and the dilophosaurus doing their own patronizing thing. If we look to other movies, you've got Xenomorphs, you've got tremor worms, you've got pumpkin head, you've got Moder (The Ritual), you've got the Blair Witch, etc.

There're plenty of good stalking monsters in film, some of which that you don't even know are there till it's too late.

EDIT:also, we see literally a few scenes later the T-Rex come outta nowhere and grab a gallimimus no problem, so they're even shown to be decent ambush predators in the same movie.

[–] JayDee 2 points 1 day ago

ELI5 please.

[–] JayDee 3 points 1 day ago

The JokeThey're calling the ocean wildlife lazy and paying them to clean up their home ecosystem.

[–] JayDee 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

TBF, Hummer's CEO didn't openly virtue signal to fascists, or butter up a President actively working to dismantle everything that makes the US safe to live in.

[–] JayDee 19 points 2 days ago

Karate chop!

 

Answer:

Tap for spoilerTHIS TOO SHALL PASS

6
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by JayDee to c/science@lemmy.world
 

This is a question regarding atomic and quantum physics, and any academic input would be appreciated. I am wanting some input on what level of trust I should put into this "Quicycle" group. It's a think tank comprised of supposed Doctors from CERN and research groups, and states their names. alot of their stuff raises red flags for me, though.

To preface, I was working on understanding how exactly, in 3d space, electron orbitals affect the magnetic field of their atoms. I'm wanting to better understand why atoms like Iron are more magnetic than others. I am not heavily plugged into the physics community, though - I'm mostly just learning out of personal curiosity.

I stumbled upon this group's periodic table of atomic orbitals, and it seems accurate on its face to a layman like myself. However, I start trying to research some of the terms and they're proposing things I've never heard of like pd-hybridization (where the p and d electron orbitals merge(?) to produce a hybrid orbital(?)).

I decided to look over their site with more rigor and I'm seeing things like Vivian Robinson: The Common Sense Universe (talking about 'common sense' when talking about quantum and "sub-quantum" mechanics seems really screwy) and M.A.R.T. (yet another theory of everything attempt) and I get a sinking feeling that nothing in this website is trustworthy for learning more in-depth physics.

Does any of this stuff look right to any Lemmy physicists?

view more: next ›