It’s like saying your rights are being trampled on if Walmart bans you from their store. You still have access to food.
With the existence of food desserts and Walmart’s decades long crusade of monopolization this is less true than you think.
Sure, you can still go buy food, but in many parts of rural US it’s now an hour+ trip each way to the gas station and costs 3x as much as you can afford. Meaning in reality you don’t.
Both 198Hg and 197Au are perfectly stable isotopes and so according to the paper not at all!
However, my layman’s understanding is that the breeder is a form of neutron irradiation, and neutron irradiation of 197Au yields 198Au which is radioactive and produces ~0.411 MeV of radiation and has a half-life of 2.69 days before decaying back to 198Hg.
Compare that with 235U. In comparison 198Au has no decay chain, ~10x less energy than the highest emitters, a much shorter half life and beta- decay instead of alpha decay.
Coverting to something like sieverts gets real tricky, but the beta decay means it’s not very penetrative, ~4mm in biological tissue, and the short half-life means it will quickly stabilize itself. Therefore as long as it’s not predominantly 198Au it’s probably fine.
GWth means 1GW of thermal energy, nothing to do with tons.
The paragraph of note from the preprint paper:
Under this simplification, there are ∼ 1.12 × 1028 fusion reactions per year in a 1 GWth fusion device. Assuming neutron multiplication is dominated by (n, 2n) reactions, in order to achieve a TBR = 1.2, at an absolute minimum 20% of all fusion reactions must have a corresponding (n, 2n) reaction in the blanket; as a less conservative value, it is known that simplified blanket configurations (2 m thick, no structure, natural Li) can achieve as high as TBR ∼ 1.85 [26], in which case at least 85% of fusion reactions must have a corresponding multiplication reaction. This range corresponds to 3.7 × 103–1.6 × 104 mol/yr, or for a product with a mass of 197 amu, 732 − 3114 kg/yr of material production.
The paper seems to report an upper bound of 3000 kg/GWth/yr.
There does seems to be some conflating of GWth (GW of thermal power) with GWe(GW of electrical power). Assuming an efficiency of ~60% would make the numbers line up and that seems in the ballpark of possible conversion efficiencies.
Not sure what one can do, but if you need a good distracting hobby I’ve heard FPV drone racing is quite a bit of fun.
where did you get 1.98?
Public database of rich people spending money on disinformation tactics: https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview
That’s the exact opposite of the Democrat’s political ideology.
Where do you get that idea?
They did though, through the creation and expansion of the secure communities program.. It was attempted to be walked back via the PEP after Obama earned the “deporter in chief” moniker, but yes the DNC did, has and will continue to do so.
Their style is usually more “don’t make a scene” then “suns out, guns out” but the end result is ultimately the same.
How did you quantity that 10x times?
My best naïve estimate puts Democrats at 1.44-1.98x as corrupt.
the Democrats had military storming our streets and black bagging US residents en masse
The Posse Comitatus Act is what generally prevents military from “black bagging US residents” and leaves that job to police.
Texas was the first state to allow for the national guard to assist in immigration efforts back in 2021. Democrats did nothing to stop, delay or prevent the expansion of those powers which were further pushed and nationalized in 2025.
The other loophole is invoking the insurrection act. While Biden did not involve it it was repeatedly threatened during the Gaza war protests, however the protests never got too riotous for the Dems to risk damaging their image and the local police were perfectly capable of documenting and black bagging people for it.
The cases of Kahlil and Mahdawi where Trump attended to deport individuals participating in those protests was made possible by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. That specific bill was introduced by the Democrats, passed the Democratic majority House and Senate, Vetoed by Democratic president Truman before being overridden by the house/Senate.
You are correct that they are “not the same”, but stating that the shield of your enemy is your friend, just because it isn’t a sword is fucking insane.
Have you?!?! IEEE 754 defines NaN, but also both a positive and negative zero (+0, -0) in addition to infinities such that x/+0 = ∞, x/-0 = -∞ and the single edge case ±0/±0 = NaN
The answer would still not be 0 as 0 is clearly still well defined within that system. NaN, undefined, etc. would be acceptable answers though. Otherwise you define:
for x > y, y - x = 0
Which defines that x = y
Resulting in the conditional x > y no longer being true
Also x/0 isn’t NaN. It’s just poorly defined and so in computing will often return “NaN” because what the answer is depends on the numbering system used and accidentally switching/conflating numbering systems is a very easy way to create a mathmatical fallacy like the one above.
That isn’t what he was convicted of. The charges brought that could’ve made this true were related to the 2023 federal indictment consisting of:
four criminal charges of conspiring to defraud the government and disenfranchise voters, and corruptly obstructing an official proceeding.
However, on November 25, 2024 Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the case without prejudice.
The felonies he was convicted for were related to the March 2023 state indictment “The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump” which consisted of:
34 criminal charges of falsifying business records in the first degree related to payments made to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election.
At no point has he been convicted of having:
engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.
He was convicted of being a fraudster, con-man, liar and sex pest but not for being an insurrectionist. This isn’t a “illegal” problem, it’s a classic case of dual tier justice and the consequences thereof. The justice system is beyond fucked, and has been for a long time. Solutions will not be coming from that line of reasoning.
Drag is mostly describing a sort of American burlesque inspired thing usually with the connotation of some amount of gender fuckery.
There are drag kings, drag queens and drag everything in betweens.
All of academia has a replication crisis at the moment however this is less theoretical than most and easily passes the sniff test.
You know how bismuth crystals have all sorts of different colors? It’s essentially growing a “bismuth crystals” on top of a cmos camera, except the “bismuth crystal” is much more random and the specific wavelength of light it lets through is dependent on some physics fuckery.
Will it ever be commercially produced? I doubt it, but hope I’m wrong:
I however do see potential uses for a cheap handheld machine that can do a quick and dirty material composition check. Contaminant tester (drugs, assembly lines, chemical stocks, etc.), hobbyist labs, chemical reaction monitor, etc.
Looting and mutual aid
I’m blanking on the exact phrase, but it’s something like “never believe a number with unreported error”.
To get further into the weeds there is a significant difference in approach between theoretical and experimental science. In experimental science it’s not only enough to communicate what you “know” but to communicate the underlying biased, tolerances and precisions of the thing being measured and modeling approach being used.
these represent the threshold of the known.
I would argue that those representations are inherently bad science because they do not communicate the margin of error. Grue, I believe you are spot on with a concept in how you would make those drawings more scientifically accurate, but ultimately they are artistic renderings of scientific understandings, but not scientific themselves.
While I don’t disagree with WoodScientist that modern scientific institutions are inherently conservative, the process of science is not, nor should it be. Apologizing for the inherent conservatism in science is unscientific, harms belief in vetted resulted, conflates institutions for processes and projects a people problem onto the inanimate.
Weird how electing Jim Crow Joe only made the problem worse.
Yep, so unless you have a passport you now might not be able to take any form of air transportation.
Since Nixon vs. Humphrey vs. Wallace back in 1968.
In 2024 pproximately 59.0% of voting age population voted, which is 63.9% of voting eligible population.
2020 was the only year to surpass with 62.8% VAP/65.3% VEP.
3rd place is 2008 with 58.3% 61.6%.
~1 in 100 when talking about demographics and populations is in fact very common. There’s a reason prevalence is usually reported in #/100000.
However, it might be better to compare to employment rates, based on US census data that’s about as common as engineers/architects(1.8%), social workers(1.7%), legal workers(1.1%), all scientists(0.9%), or farming+logging workers (0.7%).
There are more trans/enby individuals than scientists, and you don’t see anyone saying “if scientist were normal and commonly occuring…”
In addition to everything you mentioned it’s also heavily subsidized as a baseline with >38B in subsidies vs the 170.38B meat market and 74.16B dairy market. Direct subsidies alone account for 15% of the total market.
It’s worth noting that it’s more often the ‘type 1’ vegan which is generally more effective at this, and why they’re seen as ecoterrorists and why things like ag-gag laws “needed” to be passed.