TMEHpodcast

7 ms·

31.
Launched on July 10, 1962, Telstar 1(airandspace.si.edu)
4 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|1 comments
32.
Quantum battery model achieves theoretical speed limit(phys.org)
1 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|0 comments
33.
VLT timelapse of 3I/ATLAS, a new interstellar object(eso.org)
1 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|0 comments
34.
Earth is going to spin much faster over the next few months(livescience.com)
4 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|0 comments
35.
Scientists uncover mechanism that causes formation of planets(phys.org)
4 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|0 comments
36.
At 1.3B Light-Years Wide, Quipu Is Officially the Biggest Thing in Our Universe(sciencealert.com)
2 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|0 comments
37.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
I’ve often wondered what This American Life would have been if it were British. “Each week, we bring you stories of life in Britain. Not extraordinary life. Not even particularly interesting life. Just… life. Grey, tea-soaked, mildly apolog
38.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Yes, I realize not-having initially understood what LOC DNS actually is. As mentioned, this could of course be applied to Hubble.
39.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Relativity isn’t needed because rockets never get anywhere near the speeds or gravitational extremes where Einstein’s equations matter. At rocket speeds, Newtonian mechanics is so accurate the difference is negligible, so why make things ha
40.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Brilliant! This is both clever and educational. I immediately wondered if it would be possible to do something similar for JWST. Unfortunately LOC DNS records top out at ~42 million meters (42,000 km altitude) and JWST is 38x further out (~
41.
The Bille, a Self-Righting Tetrahedron That Nobody Was Sure Could Exist(iflscience.com)
1 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|0 comments
42.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Newton leaving it to “future work” is iconic, like casually predicting neuroscience. Meanwhile, French mathematician Lagrange solved orbital parking mechanic over a century before we sent rockets into space
43.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
You’re correct. Newton wasn’t proposing a mechanism or deeper cause for gravity; he just described its effects. Einstein did add a “why” of sorts, with general relativity, he reframed gravity not as a force but as the curvature of spacetime
44.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Newton’s physics is still taught and used everywhere because it’s simple and accurate enough for 99% of practical situations. Einstein’s relativity isn’t a better explanation, it just extends it to extreme conditions. NASA still uses Newton
45.
July 5, 1687: When Newton explained why you don't float away(multiverseemployeehandbook.com)
102 points by TMEHpodcast 1y ago|106 comments
46.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Great analogy: “Stopping data climate collection is like breaking a thermometer because you don’t like knowing you’ve got a fever.”
47.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Now you’re speaking my language! Let’s get started shall we?
48.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Closed-loop systems like on the ISS already reclaim water from humidity, sweat, and urine, and could be scaled up for larger habitats. Air works similarly: CO₂ is scrubbed, oxygen is regenerated from electrolysis, and trace gases are filter
49.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Starship feels like the ultimate engineering gamble, so many moving parts (literally) that getting it right might be as hard as building the habitats it’s meant to launch. On nitrogen, I keep wondering: if in-space manufacturing matured, co
50.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
I agree and I’m old enough to remember when Reddit was like this
51.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Closest approach will be October 29, 2025. It’s currently passing Jupiter’s orbit. I’m amazed that even at this speed it will take that long to get here. “Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it
52.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Actually no. Gravity is slightly weaker at your head than at your feet (because it’s farther from Earth’s center). According to general relativity, clocks tick faster in weaker gravity. The effect of your head being higher up outweighs the
53.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
I made a significant error conflating different levels of the quantum gravity problem. Special relativity and quantum mechanics have indeed been successfully merged since the Dirac equation in 1928, forming quantum field theory that underli
54.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Thank you! Although don’t go back too far, season one is admittedly a bit of a mess, conceptually ok in places but narratively scattered, but like a corporate handbook that's been photocopied too many times. Season two focuses on space
55.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
So from what I understand from this theory, a smartphone carries more "temporal weight" than a simple molecule based on its assembly history. Feels complementary to quantum emergence rather than contradictory. Maybe quantum correl
56.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Thank you so much for the kind words—this made my day. Would it be alright if I quoted this on the website? It really captures what the podcast aims for.
57.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
This is fun and addictive! Feature request: Bonus points if you know where you are (geo-guesser-like)
58.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Yes, in this quantum scheduling system, all the potential meeting attendees would exist in superposition, simultaneously traveling to Conference Room A, Conference Room B, and the Zoom link that nobody can find. Only when someone actually a
59.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
Probably subconscious. I tend to use "instant" when trying to sound more technical/physics-y and "moment" when being more conversational. If time is emergent, both words are describing the same phenomenon. It's
60.
by TMEHpodcast 1y ago
OP here. This is a blog post for a science comedy podcast, so the science is accurate but delivered with about 47% more workplace humour than you'd find in Physical Review Letters. The core premise is based on real, cutting-edge physic

More ›