I exist or something probably

  • 0 Posts
  • 599 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle
  • Yes, all of that is obviously true between shirts, the question is about shirt color, which is almost entirely down to the pigments used in fabrication. In which case it is entirely due to the absorptivity, emissivity, reflectance, and opacity, of the pigment.

    This isn’t an active area of debate, it’s an entirely empirical question or a hard modeling problem per shirt manufacturer. All of this is very solved science, and has become “an engineering problem”




  • If they have identical or close enough emissivity it is directly proportional to heat absorption, as given identical amounts of time in the sun and air flow, temperature will almost entirely depend in absorptivity, and emitted infrared is proportional to temperature^4.

    Black bodies emit and absorb perfectly. These probably all have an emissivity that’s lower than a blackbody, and very close together, while absorptivity is related to the color of the shirt. So this test is actually fairly indicative.


  • Umbrias@beehaw.orgtosolarpunk memesLibertarians be like
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    That’s not ancap libertarianism nor effectively even mundane libertarianism, ultimately. In a practical sense that libertarianism is only opposed to strictly chattel slavery (at best! Get many libertarians behind closed doors they may not even go that far!), not things like debt slavery, wage slavery, company scrip, etc.

    Because they ultimately don’t generally care about market freedom, they want the unrestricted power to be feudal lords of their polities.


  • Umbrias@beehaw.orgtosolarpunk memesLibertarians be like
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Under the extremes of libertarianism the logic for why slavery would not happen isn’t that “it wouldn’t be allowed”, remember, they view a government system as bad, there’s not strictly a government to enforce a lack of slavery.

    The extreme libertarian position is that the market will self regulate moral bads, so slavery would only be disallowed inasmuch as it was uneconomical to forcefully enslave people. This, under their reasoning, might be true because you’re under contract with a security company who keeps you from getting enslaved, among other services, and will actively go to corporate war to protect the sanctity of their contracts for fear of losing business in the future.

    This is obviously a fantasy.

    Libertarians generally have no qualms with slavery, not in a strict sense. Some libertarians certainly dislike it, but don’t have a strict philosophical backing for why it wouldn’t be allowed under true zero government systems.


  • legalization of slavery

    I’m sorry but do you think private commerce had zero interest in the trade of flesh?

    A government is not some magic special construct. Am authoritarian governance system is the same whether it’s enacted by something with a national moniker or a corporate one.





  • That’s true of our numbering system. It’s literally am identical base system, you just need to learn the numerals.

    abcd where a is the 1000s place, b is the 100s place, c is the 10s place and d the 1s. In both systems you can immediately interpret any part of the number by looking at that place in the number.

    For example in the first example you can parse it easily in any order, the number is 1993, read from top left to bottom right it is literally 90+3+1000+900. Or you can simply read it from BL to TR and it reads 1000+900+90+3.

    This system makes sense in the context of saving expensive paper/parchment (as was often extremely valuable, many books have been cleared and written over to save paper throughout history)





  • Fire is much more complex than that. Fires appearance comes from:

    • blackbody radiation, as you point out from smoke particles but also from gaseous components
    • chemiluminescence, the chemical reaction itself emits light, and this is why fires can burn in different colors. In fact you can buy additives which are generally metals which make fires burn blue or green or red, etc.

    Fire is an active chemical reaction. It’s a transition between often solid or liquid, sometimes gaseous, fuels, into gaseous products, all while undergoing a chemical reaction. It’s not a state of matter, states of matter concern the phase of equilibrium conditions, and fire is decidedly not in equilibrium.



  • Radiation related effects among workers was not high. Additionally, radiation workers do accept higher risk of dose due to direct financial benefit. A few workers received clinical doses of radiation, while the vast majority received much less than the alara linear no threshold exposure limits. You are at greater risk increase in general from things like working in a grocery store, or working a construction site, or any other industrial plant, than really any nuclear worker has of radiation poisoning. It’s hilariously dishonest and misinformed with how paranoid folks are about radiation. Hilariously radiation workers generally receive less dose than the general public because they work in buildings with large amounts of voicers, metal, and incidental shielding!

    The general public around fukushima is more likely to get cancer from red meat than they are from the fukushima event.

    Regardless, fukushima and Chernobyl are entirely incomparable.




  • Uncritically lumping Chernobyl in with TMI and fukushima loses you all credibility.

    Chernobyl, where a critically mismanaged and politically nigh guaranteed failed emergency response to a similarly guaranteed foreseen design failure leading to hundreds of thousands of dosed people across all of Europe

    … Compared to events largely which have had no detectable radiological health effects on non workers anywhere.

    The nuclear industry is far and away the safest and most scrutinized of any industry, try to be honest when you’re making arguments.

    The reason people don’t want to put nuclear facilities in convenient places is paranoia.

    Complaining about Joshua trees for this is somewhat silly, it’s not one or the other, but the environmental impact is worth discussing.