EPTAsk and answer stupid questions here! - Page 507
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On October 02 2016 22:02 Simberto wrote: The problem is that he has no stars in the background, which makes it a lot harder to track movement, including your own. Thus, he could at most measure the net total force on him by measuring the acceleration it inflicts upon him. I guess by moving around a bit and comparing the net forces, you can get a good idea about where stuff is. The problem is that he doesn't really know if any of the stuff is moving relative to him, so i think it would be hard to get good data this way. The black holes themselves don't inflict a lot of radiation as far as i know (I think Hawking radiation is not a lot), but the stuff falling into them does (Which means that black holes are often pretty shiny). I assume what we are talking about here is a situation late in a universe, where there are no more stars left, and most matter has already been sucked into black holes, but those haven't evaporated yet. In that situation, my first course of action would be launching a bunch of drones into all directions, and observing the trajectories they take. This is basically the same as observing the gravitational forces upon yourself, but you have a lot more data points, and you could notice a black holes in your trajectory before it eats you. With the data from all of these probes, you should be able to map out the black holes and their trajectories rather well. Uhh, I think an accelerometer + gyroscope would solve every single issue you might have, no need to overcomplicate it. Not sure exactly how much they emit, I'm just assuming you have a fairly precise photodetector, one that might even be able to count each individual photon impact. I don't think that's far out of reach from reality, given how easily we can count individual ticks of alpha or beta decay. | ||
|
solidbebe
Netherlands4921 Posts
| ||
|
Birdie
New Zealand4438 Posts
On October 02 2016 22:40 veQ wrote: So If I want to go with hypertrophy trainng. Heres question. If i do different push ups (wide,narrow,diamond, archer, spider, alternating) around home to the point of being unable to do more and after few sets i stop. Then after few hours cycle to the near city to do some bar exercises (but not to the point of total muscle failure) does it act againts the stymuli and overall hypertrophy? (cant get over the mindset that people are watching cus its by the lake and local pool so people drive through there rather frequently. What do you mean by hypertrophy training? Every kind of exercise should result in some kind of hypertrophy. If by bar exercises you mean body-weight exercises then you should be completely fine, it won't slow your progress by doing both pushups and bar exercises. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
As for tricep and chest, I don't think you'd get much out of it in terms of strength/mass gains. For hypertrophy, you need to get the large volume in a smaller interval, since after a few hours pass, your muscles have already entered the healing stage where they are going to be sore and weak. What I mean is for example if you squat, you'll be able to do more weight if you do 8 sets of squats in one sitting with small breaks (60 to 150 seconds), versus doing 4, and coming back 4 hours later and doing 4 more sets. As for overworking, I don't think that should be a big concern if you aren't going to failure over and over once you're there, and even if you are, I think the cost of it wont be too big - or you might overwork for the first couple weeks and it'll cost a bit more than it'll help, but after a few weeks, your body will adjust, and you won't be overworking your muscles anymore. | ||
|
Buckyman
1364 Posts
Can't you just shine your narrow-beam headlights directly forwards along your trajectory and watch for backscatter from gravitational lensing? You could also deploy a laser-equipped drone forwards and watch for unexpected redshift and deflection, I guess, which would be more energy efficient. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
|
Oshuy
Netherlands529 Posts
On October 03 2016 23:34 Djzapz wrote: Business landline phones use 2x AAA Ni-MH rechargeable batteries with 630 mAH, those batteries barely hold a charge anymore and they'll die from 15 minutes talking on the phone or 4-5 hours idling off the dock. When I google the exact battery model (HHR-65AAABU) it turns up that they're "phone batteries" and they're more expensive than other Ni-MH rechargeable batteries. Can I just slap any AAA Ni-MH rechargeable batteries in that phone? Yes, any AAA will be fine. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Cool thanks! | ||
|
Birdie
New Zealand4438 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On October 06 2016 09:58 Birdie wrote: How does limit hold'em strategy differ from no limit hold'em? You may want to consider pressing the "liquidPoker" button on the top right of the page for better answer to that question.  | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 06 2016 13:11 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Let's say that someone died, got taxidermied, and willed his taxidermied self to someone (say a relative). Would that person be allowed to sell the taxidermy? Are we allowed to sell people? | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18393 Posts
| ||
|
Thouhastmail
Korea (North)876 Posts
On October 06 2016 13:11 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Let's say that someone died, got taxidermied, and willed his taxidermied self to someone (say a relative). Would that person be allowed to sell the taxidermy? hell no. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
Corpses aren't people. But there are usually laws relating to their shipping, handling, storage, etc. Taxidermy itself is not far off from mummification, so I have to imagine you could get away with that part. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28874 Posts
On October 06 2016 09:58 Birdie wrote: How does limit hold'em strategy differ from no limit hold'em? from those bots that seemed to have figured out limit holdem, it seemed like the strategy was pretty much 'raise every street every hand'. That makes you go broke pretty fast in nolimit. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
On October 06 2016 09:58 Birdie wrote: How does limit hold'em strategy differ from no limit hold'em? Basically pot odds change. In limit at most you can bet 1 big blind, or in pot-limit/PL you can bet pot. In no-limit/NL you can bet or raise any amount. I don't think limit is really popular so this is more about PL. In poker the aim is to not make negative value decisions. For example, suppose you are playing a game where you flip a coin and get however much money you bet back if you chose correctly. If you bet $1 on heads and $1 on tails all the time, you expect to lose $1 all the time, which is negative value. This is because you have 50% for only one of heads or tails to land. In poker, it's not heads or tails, but what is the % that you win the pot, which involves calculating fold %, hand range, and pot odds. Specifically in PL, your bet size is limited. This specifically means that you have a huge drawing edge. Let's consider a situation in PL. Suppose you are on a flush draw on the turn. That means you have a 20% chance to catch your flush on the river. In PL, your opponent can only bet up to pot. Imagine there is $100 in the pot, so your opponent bets max $100. This means that you have to call $100 to win $300 total. That means you need to be right 100/300=33% of the time. But you will only win 20% of the time, so you should not call. Straightforward? Let's consider a situation in NL. Suppose you are on a flush draw on the turn. That means you have 20% chance to catch your flush on the river. In NL, your opponent can bet whatever he/she wants. Imagine there is $100 in the pot, so your opponent bets $1000. This means you have to call $1000 to win $2100 total. That means you need to be right 1000/2100=47% of the time. But you will only win 20% of the time, so you should not call. Let's consider another situation in PL. Suppose you are on a flush draw on the flop. That means you have a 40% chance to catch your flush by the river. So you bet pot, $100, in a pot of $100. In PL you can only be raised pot+bet+call, so your opponent can only raise you to $400 (raised $300). This means that you now have to call $300 to win $800. This is about 40% so calling is not a mistake if you think that you can get to the river without putting more money in. Let's consider another situation in NL. Suppose you are on a flush draw on the flop. That means you have a 40% chance to catch your flush by the river. So you bet pot, $100, in a pot of $100. In NL you can be raised any amount, so your opponent raises you to $500. This means that you now have to call $400 to win $900. This is about 44% so calling is definitely a mistake. In reality, there are more nuances to the game, so the percentages never work out that way, but in terms of game theory, the limit of the bet size makes the betting decisions much easier to figure out. | ||
|
Epishade
United States2267 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jClSWXD.jpg) What do you guys think of my mathematical proof that square root of 2 equals 2? | ||
| ||
