4 ms·
it's not confusing, it's just silly, the Iron Age ended over 2000 years ago, so there were just no ages between the birth of Christ and LK-99?
by yellowcake0 3y ago
it's not confusing, it's just silly, the Iron Age ended over 2000 years ago, so there were just no ages between the birth of Christ and LK-99?
- optimalsolver 3y agoNone which are generally accepted by historians that happen to be named after a single substance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-age_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-age_system
- yellowcake0 3y agoThat's only for prehistory. In any case it's a pretty silly contrivance, how about the oil age? or the silicon age? Both of those are likely to remain more impactful than the LK-99 age, in the event that it does turn out to be an ambient temp/pressure superconductor.
- optimalsolver 3y agoIf replicated, those are gonna be footnotes to LK-99 and its likely many derivatives and close cousins.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]