Good on you. It takes courage to admit to something like that and to move in a direction you believe is right despite your upbringing. I’m in a situation with some similarities to yours, and while im still coming to terms with things and not ready to talk about it yet I want you to know that you posting your story and owning your mistakes is inspiring
Id argue its still valid. Given that the people in charge (US perspective) dont give a shit about us beyond our productivity, $2tril of economic damage is probably exactly the same to them as being hit by a nuke. Honestly it might even hurt the parasite class more than a nuke because at least with a nuke they’d have pretense to go to war over it
Pedantically, I think you could call muon tomography an antimatter imaging method. It doesnt explicitly use antimatter as a probe, but you do often measure products of antimatter decay or decay products that are antimatter themselves when doing it (depending on how much fidelity you need on the structure being imaged). I say pedantically because I assume you meant medical imaging methods and muon tomography doesnt have medical applications afaik
That is a fundamental misunderstanding of how magnetic fields and the forces they induce work. Attract and guide are both words that mean the same thing in this context, ie “apply force to.” Not sure what else to tell you; I dont feel like teaching you electrodynamics so I wont reply to this thread again.
That is correct. It also has nothing to do with the original claim I made and you disagreed with, which is that the object with the greater magnetic field would be able to attract particles from farther away.
The absolute distance is strictly irrelevant given this is a relative comparison between two magnetic fields. The one that is 6 orders of magnitude higher will maintain that 6 orders of magnitude difference exactly the same at a distance of 100m as it will at a distance of 100au. That means that the stronger field will maintain the minimum strength required to “guide” particles towards the dipole at a greater distance than the weaker magnetic field would. I feel you if you’re only trying to argue that it would still need to be within some neighborhood of some star to produce an aurora, but your posts read like you’re claiming 6 orders of magnitude on the magnetic field makes no difference on how close that object would need to be to produce an aurora, which is flatly incorrect.
I dont think you’re quite understanding how big 6 orders of magnitude is. 4000000/r2 still falls off way slower than 1/r2.
Also the funnel diagram of the earth’s magnetic field you’re referring to is a near field effect. In the far field regime the only field components that stay strong enough to be relevant are those parallel to the axis of the dipole; a dipole is functionally identical to a bar magnet if you’re measuring it from far enough away. If my understanding of solar wind is correct and the aurora refers to an interaction that occurs between the earth’s magnetic field and particles near the sun, we’re definitely in the far field regime
I mean, it has a magnetic field 6 or 7 orders of magnitude higher than ours. Id guess that extra strength allows it to pull particles from much further away and possibly from sources much more reticent to give up their particles than solar wind
A lot of people already mentioned it but geant4 is the gold standard for that kind of simulation. It could also be worth looking into pythia if you’re interested in simulating high energy events with geant4
Would be dope if she actually turns over a new leaf. Im not willing to bet anything on it, but I’m willing to engage in a bit of cautious optimism and see if she lives by those words over the next few years
From the same type of motherfucker who somehow both understands concepts like the scientific method and interpreting data, but will look at a 15% pass rate in their entry level classes and blame it on the students
Coming back to the civilian world is hard as fuck, especially if you woke up during your time with the military. You get home and people call you a hero for what amounts to crimes against humanity, and if you try to explain the horror to them you get labeled crazy and dangerous. Nobody wants to hear that their government is run by mass murdering psychopaths and nobody wants to believe that “defense” is a myth that tricked their friends/family into participating in said mass murder. I was lucky enough to have the financial and emotional support to spend a year just working on myself, but i still have times where something will remind me of what I’ve seen and been part of and all I can do is hide myself and cry, and it still makes me uncomfortably furious when I hear people who have never experienced meaningful violence in their lives wish it upon others. I completely understand why some people who get home and immediately have to work to survive turn to a career with people who can at least understand/accept them and their trauma. It can feel like the only other option is isolation until inevitable suicide.
Was working on a PhD in CS focused on industrial cybersecurity, though current events involving the three letter agency that funded my research lead to me crashing out and now I’m trying to get into law school and do immigration law. Far too frail and pasty to buy a farm though