Comments by "Cestarian Inhabitant" (@cestarianinhabitant5898) on "Veritasium" channel.

  1. It'll probably be relatively soon, courtesy of spacex.
    5
  2. Interesting theory to try to disprove rather than prove things. I was beginning to think that the rule was just any sequence of 3 numbers.
    2
  3. This was very interesting... Wouldn't this make manufacturing metallic objects in space extremely efficient with this sort of perfect welding technique that doesn't really cost any energy to achieve whilst in space? Space is an interesting place to put a factory I guess. Also curious what other objects can be welded together this way, this might work for some non-metallic objects where it would usually be very difficult to seamlessly attach 2 pieces of the same material together.
    1
  4. This... This is revolutionary...
    1
  5. They are so American...
    1
  6. wow, 2nm processors, that'd be quite something. just 1nm to go.
    1
  7. If the problem is the synchronization of the 2 clocks, it's not that difficult of a problem. You need a third device. 2 clocks 1 device that sets and synchronizes the clock. Just think of it like this. The 'synchronizer' is position in the middle between the two clocks, it sends out a pulse to both clocks at the same time, the clocks then after a little time send a signal back, and the synchronizer compares the signals and if they match, the clocks are synchronized, if they don't match, the clocks are desynchronized. The problem in the end though, is that this experiment can't truly be executed with perfect precision, because perfect precision does not exist. Even if you manage to perfectly position the synchronizer between the two clocks, one side's wire might still be just a few millimiters longer than the other; which is enough to cause a delay in the signal ruining the accuracy of the synchronization. There's also the problem that you cannot verify that the clocks are exactly identical down to the atomic level, due to the precision we are aiming to achieve, since the speed at which light travels is no damn joke after all, this would be necessary. Even if all parameters are perfected, the clocks are identical, the connectors between them and the synchronizer as well are identical, there would still be a margin of error because we simply do not know everything. But there's another way we can measure the one way speed of light. With more precision, instead of measuring how fast light travels over 1km, you could just measure how fast it travels over a few meters or centimeters using only one clock that's started and stopped by the light. However, ultimately, if we want to assume that the speed of light is constant, we need to measure how fast it travels in all directions, and in different environments (air, liquid, vaccum...), and over different distances (1 meter, 1km, 100km, etc) in order to truly confirm it, and we need to do this with outrageous levels of precision for it to hold any weight.
    1
  8. I already knew all this... And yet... I feel like I never *knew* it at all now. I didn't actually know that things that feel warmer to the touch can actually be the same temperature as something that feels colder, even if I knew about thermal conductivity I just never added up that knowledge to realize this fact until now. Same deal about how fast the ice melted, a part of me knew that it would melt faster on the aluminium because of thermal conductivity, but until I actually saw it a bigger part of me believed it'd melt faster on the warmer feeling plastic. But what I actually didn't know was that I can't trust my skin to measure temperature at all.
    1
  9. Look at that! This video had a different thumbnail and title just yesterday when I watched it!
    1
  10. Doubt it can take a bullet, but maybe it can take an arrow. Imagine if medieval knights had access to this kind of coating for their armor :D they'd have had much stronger and lighter armor with shock absorbing properties so less problems with blunt weapons.
    1
  11. The reason why I would not take the bet is because I am opposed to taking a bet where I don't know my odds, or where my odds are 50% or lower, in this case it's 50% so not $10 not $1 not $100. I would have taken a $15 for $10 gamble though. So I feel good about my odds when I stand to gain 50% more than I stand to lose, at these low stakes. If the stakes were higher, I would react pretty much the same as most in the video did and avoid it until I'm guaranteed not to leave empty handed.
    1
  12. Could it be used in fire extinguishers? I imagine if you can spray this stuff over an open flame it would die right?
    1