Recent content by pines-demon

What is yours?

Don't be so hard on yourself we all do mistakes. I find much worse inaccuracies every day just looking at social media.

I have the feeling that we already discussed something similar about this case, but anyway, do you know which scientists did not shake his hand and worked in the Manhattan Project?

So we keep the Big Ben as it is no matter the dimension? Make sense. But then wouldn't the visibility of an equilateral-triangle base clock increase too?

What do I do if I am looking at a vertex? Let's say we put the 6 clock faces in the faces of a cube, what happens when looking at three faces at the same time? What do I use as a valid angle? A valid solid angle? I am wondering this because the Big Ben could be basically a cuboid with 6 faces...

And you want to have symmetrical faces right? you can get angles larger than 30 degrees with an isosceles triangle for example.

Ok, but it still has four clock faces? This might be a dumb quesiton but I thought I was missing something. Also, just for the sake of understanding the question, if the base was an equilateral triangle, would that visibility property change?

I don't get it what is this property of the clock in the Big Ben that allows somebody to see it from every angle? Does it not have just 4 synchronized clocks? And I guess we are assuming the base is always a square?

I am ok both ways.

That works for me.

Maybe the subforum should be in the "art, music, history, literature" forum instead of the general discussion forum.

The most visible problem in Barandes unistochastic formalism as an interpretation is that there is no example of it outside quantum mechanics.

OP needs to read: How to Better Define Information in Physics

What about music? has it reached critical mass?

Also obituaries are already posted there. Edit: and Nobel prize predictions could go in the history forum too