551–560 of 839 posts
Quantum Computers. Not like I'm five, but like I'm a software engineer who has a pretty decent understanding of how a classical turing machine works. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "qubits are like bits except they don't have to be just 1 or 0" without providing any coherent explanation of how that's useful. I've also heard that they can try every possible solution to a problem. What I don't u…
[deleted]
the fundamentals of computer science. Unlike many who comment here regularly, I am not a programmer or developer and though it might seem silly, the way in which a bunch of code written in a programming language of any sort translates to a computer physically or electrically causing things to "happen" because of it has always been a bit fuzzy. I know that electronic systems and machines translate all instructions to…
https://www.nand2tetris.org/ may also be insightful, but I did not look further into to.
Has someone that thought they were taking LSD ever turned into a permanent schizophrenic zombie or in a mental institution, or is it all urban legend. If someone that didn't know they were predisposed to mental illness, is it applicable to dismiss their experience in order to maintain how safe LSD is? If any of this is true, are there any sources aside from "my friend's friend's brother took too much and now he is...…
Permanent schizophrenic zombie, maybe a bit extreme, but severe and traumatic long-lasting psychological damage is a not-uncommon phenomena. I had a fling with psychedelics in my teens, and everything was great until the one time it wasn't. I was taking psychedelics pretty much every weekend, and by my count have tried over a dozen of them. Had an experience with LSD which completely shook me to my core and gave me s…
> Permanent schizophrenic zombie, maybe a bit extreme, but severe and traumatic long-lasting psychological damage is a not-uncommon phenomena.
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6124/does-not-un...
https://towardsdatascience.com/an-introduction-to-multivaria...
HOW PSYCHEDELICS REVEALS HOW LITTLE WE KNOW ABOUT ANYTHING - Jordan Peterson | London Real --> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaY0H9DBokA
Jordan Peterson - The Mystery of DMT and Psilocybin --> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gol5sPM073k
> LSD being the particular substance has nothing to do with it, in my opinion. I was young, dumb, reckless, and played with fire then got burned. It could have happened with any of the other dozen psychedelics I took, but it just so happened to be LSD the one time that it did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_percep...
I have a close friend who had the same experience with excessive use of marijuana, but my money would be on psychedelics being far more likely to produce the outcome you unfortunately experienced. He's much better today, but not entirely "ok".
> But I want to add, that while giving me the most nightmarish, traumatizing experience of my life, the best/most positively-profound experience has also been on the same substance. I grew up in a pretty abusive household and didn't do well forming relationships growing up, and had a lot of anger and resentment in my worldview. After taking psychedelics (LSD, 2C-B, Shrooms) and MDMA with the right group of people a few times, my entire perspective shifted. For the first time in my life, it felt like I understand how it felt to be loved, and what "love" was, and how we're "all in this together" so we may as well be good to each other while we're here.
This sounds rather similar to my friend's story.
Can Taking Ecstasy (MDMA) Once Damage Your Memory?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081009072714.h...
According to Professor Laws from the University’s School of Psychology, taking the drug just once can damage memory. In a talk entitled "Can taking ecstasy once damage your memory?", he will reveal that ecstasy users show significantly impaired memory when compared to non-ecstasy users and that the amount of ecstasy consumed is largely irrelevant. Indeed, taking the drug even just once may cause significant short and long-term memory loss. Professor Laws findings are based on the largest analysis of memory data derived from 26 studies of 600 ecstasy users.
> (from your comment below) I took 300ug of LSD recklessly on a particularly bad day for me, in a particularly uncomfortable setting.
https://www.trippingly.net/lsd/2018/5/3/phases-of-an-lsd-tri...
Lots of details, plus dosage guide (25 ug and up) & typical experinces
https://www.reddit.com/r/LSD/comments/34acza/do_you_guys_bel...
imo 300ug is the point where you need to have some serious experience with tripping to be able to handle yourself. because if you're coming up, the acid is already circulating your bloodstream, and you get that horrible sinking sensation of thinking you've taken too much... you're in for a really bad time if you don't know how to control the trip.
I think it's difficult to say how big a dose really is until you've had a bad trip on it. only then can you see how insidious everything can get and as such just how intense 300ug can be. the reason people say not to start on doses like that is so they will AVOID those horrible experiences. so yeah, 300ug is a large dose, just because if shit goes wrong on it then you're fucked.
Flight. How can a plane fly when it's thrust to weight ratio is less than one? It's like, if you can produce 10 pounds of thrust, who would look at that and say "ah ha, we can use this to keep a 100 pound machine miles in the air indefinitely"? I understand flight from a mathematical point of view. I've actually read a few books on the subject, and I could explain how flight works to someone. However, I'm still fishi…
The 10 pounds trust is used to overcome the airodynamic friction, when the plane is in high speed. Because the "way" around the wing is longer on one side compared to the other this create a lower pressure on one side, and higher on the other. This pressure both lift and push the plane up. If there was zero friction you would hold the plane up with zero thrust ;) I build this at school, using the same principle: http…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consider the vectors of the four forces (thrust, drag, lift, weight). The thrust only needs to equal the drag at a given airspeed, not the weight of the vehicle. (Unless it's climbing vertically.) The weight is countered by the lift generated by the wings, which, given the efficiency of airfoils, is very more or less why it all works: they produce a positive lift-to-drag ratio. Put another way, weight pulls it down,…
So the 'glide ratio' is essentially a multiplier from 'thrust' to 'lift'?
the fundamentals of computer science. Unlike many who comment here regularly, I am not a programmer or developer and though it might seem silly, the way in which a bunch of code written in a programming language of any sort translates to a computer physically or electrically causing things to "happen" because of it has always been a bit fuzzy. I know that electronic systems and machines translate all instructions to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Minute Physics and 3brown1blue did a two part collab that simplifies some of it down to a counting problem that'd be suitable for grade school. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcqZHYo7ONs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzRCDLre1b4
I have seen the example with the polarized lenses in a few places, but they dont explain why (imo) the simplest explanation does not apply. Namely that the lens itself might disturb the phase of the light, which would then mean it can pass through the next lens.
Quantum Computers. Not like I'm five, but like I'm a software engineer who has a pretty decent understanding of how a classical turing machine works. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "qubits are like bits except they don't have to be just 1 or 0" without providing any coherent explanation of how that's useful. I've also heard that they can try every possible solution to a problem. What I don't u…
• Magnetism. There are plenty of videos out there calling it the result of a relativistic charge imbalance. But I've never been able to use this point-of-view to practical use cases like understanding how permanent magnets work or how increasing the number of windings in inductors boosts the magnetic field strength. There were more situations I tried to put this POV into use but I can't remember them off the top of m…
The issue with wave-particle duality is that most of us think about it backwards. The universe is actually made of quantized fields. Both particles and waves are imprecise models/approximations. There's no such thing as a particle, instead there are just excitations of this field which we cannot measure with complete accuracy.
I very much dislike this phrasing, because it suggests that it is just us that are not capable of building an apparatus to enable us to do so.
Imagine a gear transmission or a lever: You can transform distance into force and vice versa. It is up to your choosing if you want to go with more speed or more force by changing the point along the lever, where your transmission happens. It is not possible to build a transmission, which gives you the most distance and the most force simultaneously. In this system of transmission, one is the other, just a different perspective.
And it is the same with the location and impulse of a quantum. You can choose to have more information in the shape of location or more in the shape of impulse by changing your measurement (like the point along the lever). But you can't have both, because there is only a constant amount of information which is represented in a combination of location and impulse.
Actually, the uncertainty part of heisenberg uncertainty principle is a purely mathematical limitation (called Gabor limit) and only the Planck constant makes it physical.
Gabor limit: a • b >= 1/(4•PI)
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle: a • b >= h/(4•PI)
So the Planck constant is kind of the maximal sampling resolution of the fields / signals in our universe.