@Zxyrra This is a global site. There were medieval periods in other parts of the world. While conflating Medieval Europe with the Middle Ages makes some sense, it does close off the possibility about what happening in other parts of the world during the Middle Ages (during that specific time period). The two tags can be kept for clarity and precision.
@a4android My arguement is not that the terms are synonymous - it's that all medieval europe questions fit within middle ages yet no other tags specify regions for that time period
So it seems almost too specific to have an extra tag just for the region of Europe
@Zxyrra @a4android According to the Oxford dictionary, the Middle Ages is: The period of European history from the fall of the Roman Empire in the West (5th century) to the fall of Constantinople (1453), or, more narrowly, from c.1000 to 1453., so the Middle Ages is specifically European. The question is, is it from ~500-1500 or ~1000-1500? (I'd propose the latter). Note: there is also a medieval tag for general medieval times
(technically, the dark ages are ~500-~1100 and the middle ages are ~1100-1453)
whereas 'medieval history' is the history of the period from the 5th to the 15th centuries
The period of time between the fall of the Roman Empire and the start of the Medieval period is known as the "Dark Ages" (at least in England). However, I think that the medieval tag still covers it effectively.
@Pᴇᴛᴇ Almost - The dark ages is between the fall of the Roman Empire (in the West) (~500) and the Middle Ages, while medieval history is both the dark and middle ages
ugh, I hate it when I find a question that needed a close and tidy up but loads of people alerady answered it and it's impossible to fix without invalidating a bunch of the answers :(
@TimB if the question needs to be cleaned up and needs further detail then edit it by all means. it is not the fault of the question if someone answers something half-baked
It doesn't really matter how niche the area is in real life, if it's useful to have different tags for the different questions. In other words, if there are lots of questions specifically about the middle ages and other questions about the medieval period in general, but not necessarily the middle ages, then keep them both
Although I do think that it would be nice if we had subset tags, like electricity is a subset of electromagnetism
@JourneymanGeek I do a big pitch to universities on the value of getting their grads to leave uni with at least one professional cert, as a degree usually just means "can learn" to an employer
Not that certs are bad--they're not; they're useful--but a uni degree can do you well. Most of my fellow graduates didn't have a single cert and we all got multiple job offers out of uni.
@NexTerren I'm not saying do it instead of a degree! God no. But as well as. A degree is often essential (I've hired people with computing, bilogy, law, you name it)
@JourneymanGeek you could self study something like CEH or Cybersecurity Fundamentals from ISACA. Yes they are both basic, entry level ones, but they are easy, and HR will have them on their lists
Yes, but it's about being multi-skilled. Some development, some sysadmin, software delivery etc. At least then you can develop core skills in various areas and decide what direction you want to take from there.
For some people excelling at work is a passion and a hobby. Thus they spend their passion/hobby time on it. For others, their interests lie elsewhere, and that's perfectly fine as well.
@JourneymanGeek in the dim and distant past I did printer maintenance. Some of them weighed a few tons. And had 4 or even 8 print heads. Seriously heavy dot matrix guns. That was a fun job. A wee bit dangerous, and requiring protective clothing, but fun!
Because I am thinking that with that taken care of, the coilguns that both the Gdarje in the UNERU Trilogy (and Earth's reverse-engineered counterparts), and To The Planets Beyond's space forces might no longer need a coolant.
@FutureHistorian I heard about metalic hydrogen, but last I saw they were afraid to test it because they didn't know if it was meta stable at normal atmospheric temperatures yet
Hmm, according to this: http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/01/metallic-hydrogen-update.html "At this time the sample has not been reported to have been removed from high pressure and has not had confirmation as a room temperature superconductor"
On a serious note, we lose/waste so much electricity during power transmission. If we replaced the main transmission lines with super conductors we'd be able to quarter (at least) the number of power plants pumping CO2 in to the atmosphere.
@dot_Sp0T But eventually the machines we make will get the super conductor too. Things don't always get worse. Your computer today uses a lot less power than one in the 50s, and is much more powerful.
light bulbs being powered solely by the wasted electricity from power lines
Same with cars. They are much more efficient and cleaner than in the 80s. There are lot of them still, so the problem hasn't gone away, but it is slowly getting better
Unless we for sure have them, there is not really a point in speculating what they could make better and whatnot I guess - especially it seems that they would be linked to a range of conditions that had to be created around them first
@dot_Sp0T We know the properties of super conductors now. Like being able to perfectly levitate a magnate, which would have hundreds of applications. So it's really easy to say exactly what will happen if we can come up with one that doesn't need to be cryogenically chilled to operate. We aren't really guessing, just waiting.
@dot_Sp0T in that case, I am hoping things aren't too bad on your end, though if there is anything I can do to help I would like to try to... or something
sometimes there's a way I want to say things that doesn't fit the words I have available
@dot_Sp0T Yeah, it's early days, and it might not have the properties they want. I'm not actually saying people should be optimistic about THIS one working out, just saying that when one is finally discovered to work, it'll be cool
@AndyD273 I get that, I just have a strong feeling of getting lost behind in tech and everything for some weird reason. I'll just be off to do some drawing :)
Like the EM drive. It's supposed to be tested in space sometime in the next year. Maybe it'll pan out, maybe it wont. If it works, super awesome. If not, I'm glad they at least tried it.
@dot_Sp0T Now just picture running a magnetic strip down the freeway, driving your car over it, and suddenly you're car is levitating at high speed with almost no energy cost or worry of crashing since it's like being on a rail. Or high speed levitating bullet trains. We have them now, but this would make it more economical. I hope you feel better soon.
And I was only joking with the jerk statement earlier
@AndyD273 the ideas and things we could do are endless. And the example is rather pleasant to the thought of any futurist, sorta reminds me of all these concepts and ideas of the future from the 70s
@AndyD273 it's never to late; just pick up on it - or even better first catalogue everything and condense it into a question/discussion on meta - then add your POV as an answer ;)
@RoryAlsop my brain's doing backwards flips to cope with it
@dot_Sp0T if you had holes in your clothes (or claes) at school and looked like no-one was taking care of you, you'd be called naeb'dy's bairn - literally nobody's child
@dot_Sp0T free chocolate is always a winner
but the free chilli sweets I'm currently munching are not a bad second place
@dot_Sp0T I might do the second part. I hesitate to just bring it up on chat right now. I've got a comment all typed out, but every time I read it over before hitting send I stop and try to rewrite it because I'm not sure how it'll come across, and it sort of seems like an unprovoked attack to my tired brain.
@RoryAlsop The Nac Mac Feegle language is a mix of Morporkian (English), the Glaswegian dialect ("Crivens! Whut aboot us, ye daftie") and elements of Irish and Scottish Gaelic, for example Tir-far-thóinn and geas.
The kelda in Wee Free Men states that "in our tongue you'd be Tir-far-thóinn" (an alternative name for Tír na nÓg), suggesting that in private their speech may be closer to Irish or Scottish Gaelic. This is also hinted at in Wintersmith, where Nanny Ogg's Place is given as Tir Nani Ogg, exhibiting Goidelic-type head-initial compounding. They also use the Yan Tan Tethera in counting occasionally.
I asked a question (10k link) about an hour ago. It was downvoted to -3 so I deleted it.
I explained how energy is generated in my fictional world and ask "what physics will be affected". Is this kind of question considered as bad question in this SE? Thanks.
My original post:
I asked this q...
Now that's an interesting one... A well defined question that got downvoted to oblivion with no reason given... Granted, I don't know enough physics to give a meaningful answer, but I wouldn't downvote it for that. I'd just leave it for someone that's stronger in that area.
I don't have the physics background to even try to find the logical loopholes in the question
What really bugs me about the question is that he says things like "I use 2 ways to suspend the Noether's theorem", and lists X and Y, but it doesn't actually explain how it suspends the theorem.
More importantly though, the concepts he uses aren't as simple as he thinks they are. It feels wrong to me that he wants to just apply the BT Theorem (which applies to sets) to physical objects in order to suspend a law that applies specifically to physical objects.
He mentions the "radical platonism" view, which again, isn't explained in the question at all (and doesn't help to draw any conclusions either).
He says that he wants to use the BTP to "prove" that there is something that can be broken into non measurable sets, but I'd argue that that's almost an application of Circular logic. "The BTP says non measurable sets can result in a theorietical x being turned into 2x, so x can be turned into 2x because of BTP"
I think another thing that might be a factor is that the answer to the other question (which is quoted in the new question) literally says that "We also need to clarify some things about the mass-energy equivalence and what we mean when we say "mass"" in order to answer the question
But then he says that he doesn't want to redefine "what is matter"
So in essence he's asking the exact same question as before, with more details posted, and on purpose nullifying the previous answer because the previous answer said that he would have to do something he didn't want to do in order to get a good answer.
@dot_Sp0T Also, I can't find an actual question in the deleted question.
I know the BT theorem cannot be applied to physical objects, because physical objects cannot be divided into non-measurable set. So I just assume that in my world there are such objects. I think the problem maybe my bad english, so my explanation was no clear.(my first language is not english)
"So I want to ask about my energy generation mechanism in a new post. I would like to know what physics will be affected in my framework." - This reads instantly as too broad
@Mithrandir24601 I would also instantly VTC that as too broad
We VTC questions that ask "what are the effects of X on Society" as too broad, and now you want to ask an open ended question of "what are the consequences?"?
If asking about all of Society is too broad, asking about the consequences of all of Physics (which is much more complex and broad), let alone an open ended one of "what are the consequences [implied "of everything"]" is even more broad.
Yeah, it's too broad due to the use of the word 'consequences' - a better way of putting it would be along the lines of 'what physics have a violated in order to break energy conservation' Like by breaking the symmetry of free space, you violate momentum conservation
" I would like to know what physics will be affected in my framework." is not a question. Neither is "So I want to ask about my energy generation mechanism in a new post"
@Aify It's a specific thing due to Noether's theorem - breaking a symmetry breaks a conservation, so a yet better idea of what I mean is 'what symmetry have I broken in order to get this breaking of this specific conservation law?'
@fairytale If you want an answer grounded in physics which takes into accounts the objects that your world has objects that can be divided into non-measurable sets, you must define how that object can be divided and what you mean by mass
the reason of saying "doesn't want to redefine "what is matter" ": Physical objects are formed by atoms, but not infinite points, so we cannot cut the physical objects into non-measurable set, but I don't want to say "now everything is not formed by atoms", I think this will bring more trouble.
Right: Mass is a form of energy. Breaking conservation of energy means breaking the symmetry of time. It's perfectly valid, just not seen in the real world
In any case, I've read the question at least 7 times and spent around half an hour researching the concepts brought up and their relationships with each other, and the question is still horribly unclear to me. Even if I didn't VTC it as Too Broad, at this point, I wouldve VTC'd it as unclear.
The issue you feel may be with the fact that this question is a rather theoretical one while most questions on here feel like rehashes of things almost everyone chatting in here has thought about at least once
@fairytale I think, if you want an answer, you need to explain the level of physics that you're talking about - as in, at a fundamental level, the only 'law' of physics that this is breaking is the symmetry of time, which the second law of thermo. says isn't symmetric... Everything else seems sound fundamental physics, although I'm not an expert, and it's not something I would ever, ever expect to see
@fairytale I don't know, but I would guess that the answer is unkown
I mean, what to you mean by spacetime - do you mean our universe (or multiverse if you're that way inclined)?
Maybe explaining what I just said a bit better: at a fundamental physics/mathematical level, I can't think of a reason that it doesn't work. Whereas at an experimental physics level, you'd be insane to even think of such a thing
@Aify as you say, the question is very complex, so I read many materials, including books and college physics/math lecture notes, then I tried to build up a setting, but I afraid that I have misunderstanding about those physics/math concept, so I asked the question
@fairytale "Physical objects are formed by atoms, but not infinite points" is extremely important - using "the Banach-Tarski Paradox to "prove" that there is something can be broken into non-measurable sets in my fictional world" is... iffy... Very iffy...
Having said that, it's magic so "I've magically found a way to create mass from nothing" is (to me, at least) a valid starting point on WB. Just don't include the reality-check tag...
Why I do this complex thing: I saw many criticism on stories with physical explanation on magic. For example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Certain_Magical_Index . In this story, consciousness can control the outcome of wave function (control the probability amplitude), so there is magic. (to be continue in next message)
Originally, I also used this way to explain my magic. I read few book chapters about quantum and linear algebra, I found that I'm completely wrong, and the explanation in A_Certain_Magical_Index is also wrong.
But, I think that the criticism was too heavy. if there is something wrong, it is ok to say, however, teasing the author makes me feel sorry to the author of A_Certain_Magical_Index, because not everyone studied physics in university. So I want to make a setting without physics misconception, I want to tell those people: it is possible to make such setting.
@Mithrandir24601 I think i used wrong word, it is not a prove, "there exists something can be broken into non-measurable sets" is the axiom in my world (I hope i used the right word)
Also: I've got to say it: for the 'doubling Earth's mass' question, I disagree with the first part of the answer that you've accepted: It's magic, so it's allowed to convert energy into mass with 100% efficiency (or so close that the difference in energy is negligible). And a technical point: the term 'rest mass' is outdated. Apart from that, it's a good answer to my mind
I'm the wrong person to talk to about explaining magic as physics - I believe that if something's magic, it's not physics, as (part of) my definition of magic is 'something that can't be explained by physics'
@fairytale the "there exists something can be broken into non-measurable sets" is still a fundamental issue - it's infinitely small, so has infinitely uncertain momentum (or quantum physics is invalid, which if anything, is much, much worse). But having infinitely uncertain momentum is difficult to talk about thanks to special relativity. Might not be impossible, but...
I asked a question (10k link) about an hour ago. It was downvoted to -3 so I deleted it.
I explained how energy is generated in my fictional world and ask "what physics will be affected". Is this kind of question considered as bad question in this SE? Thanks.
My original post:
I asked this q...
The Factory Floor
The Factory Floor