Conversation

Notices

1. 🐦ulon :blobshp: (birdulon@shpposter.club)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 01:53:33 JST 🐦ulon :blobshp:
   Throwing out a few paragraphs of a macroblog post after I decided to add a numeric example of a hypothesis I presented as fact and the physics turned out to be orders of magnitude wrong for my assumptions.
   
   Painful, but it's what separates us from the j**rnalists.
   • gentooP (gentoop@social.mikutter.hachune.net)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 01:53:32 JST gentooP

     in reply to

     @birdulon I just delete whole blog post and just post Hypothesis is wrong and don't elaborate.

     New Janny in Town likes this.
   • gentooP (gentoop@social.mikutter.hachune.net)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 17:10:36 JST gentooP

     in reply to

     @birdulon Don't even elaborate what the hypothesis is. Just say it's wrong, it's over. Then a abstract interpretive Art piece.

   • 🐦ulon :blobshp: (birdulon@shpposter.club)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 17:10:37 JST 🐦ulon :blobshp:

     in reply to

     • gentooP
     @gentooP I haven't published it yet
   • gentooP (gentoop@social.mikutter.hachune.net)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 17:29:29 JST gentooP

     in reply to

     @birdulon I lost exactly 2 after putting out a terrible one.
     Two, your math is terrible if reality doesn't mimic it.
     Pay two mimes to reenact the problem instead of doing animations.

   • 🐦ulon :blobshp: (birdulon@shpposter.club)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 17:29:30 JST 🐦ulon :blobshp:

     in reply to

     • gentooP
     @gentooP it has also kicked me into "I need to make 3b1b-style animations to properly illustrate this" and "maybe I should make an entire companion video for the blogpost" territory
     
     I wonder how many youtube subs I'd lose for returning after 10 years with completely different content
   • 🐦ulon :blobshp: (birdulon@shpposter.club)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 17:29:31 JST 🐦ulon :blobshp:

     in reply to

     • gentooP
     @gentooP On further reflection it was true, it just has more nuance that makes basic analysis with stuff like "assume a perfectly rigid neck" fall apart very quickly. Unfortunately, this also means another tangent and I'm probably going to have to break the post up into a series of its own to properly explore it.
     It's actually good reinforcement for the overarching theme of "the maths is simple but reality is out to confound it at every turn".