We have “family film nights”. We all have dinner together, then get out some beanbags, on the floor. We then all watch a film together, cuddled up on the beanbags.

The films are ones our daughter hasn’t seen, and can often push her boundaries. E.g. we watched “Monsters Inc” together. She was a little bit scared, but with mummy and daddy there, she loved it.

It’s definitely one for building memories together. We are too often distracted, even when present. Having dedicated family time makes a huge difference.

Oh, and she also doesn’t watch much paw patrol, even when around friends. Apparently “Daddy doesn’t like it” is quite enough to put her off it. A classic “respect over fear” situational win for me.

On a side note. The screen time correlation goes away, when you correct for the child’s parenting and lifestyle situation. It’s not “screens are bad” but that kids in worse situations watch more TV, etc. The causation is backwards.

It was the initial description used in my 1st year physics degree course. Not sure if it has an explicit name. We also jumped fairly quickly from there to the maths.

Basically space time can stretch infinitely, and flows towards mass. Anything on that spacetime is drawn along. It’s functionally identical to a standard force. Straight lines twist into spacetime spirals (aka orbits etc).

Physics has lots of interesting mental models for different things. Unfortunately, most are flawed, so dont lean on tgem too hard. What actually happens is way beyond what our monkey brains can interpret. The best we can do if follow the maths, and try and fit something to the end result.

It’s worth noting that spacetime isn’t static. Space “flows” into mass. It’s akin to a treadmill, you need to constantly move “upwards” to stay in place.

This is also the reason that uniform gravity, and acceleration are identical. With acceleration, the “ground” is constantly moving upwards into new space, pushing you along. With gravity, space is constantly moving down through the floor, trying to push you into the floor. It’s functionally the same thing.

Various events around the universe occur on human timescales. If time stopped for use, we would effectively skip ahead on the view of them.

I actually think we could reliably catch 1 second time stops. Scientists monitor various pulsars. They spin multiple times a second, throwing off radio wave pulses. If all of them suddenly went out of sync with our clocks, it would definitely be noticed. It might take several, however, to prove it wasn’t a weird hardware glitch.

Exposure can cause similar effects. However, the act of heating the plastic to the temperatures needed to melt it and defirming it also damages the structure. It’s particularly obvious with pla, but all plastics suffer from it, to an extent.

Repeating plastics tends to damage them on a chemical level. The polymer chains break and shorten. This ends with the plastic being more brittle. Since 3d printed parts have already been remelted once, they have even more degradation than injection moulded parts.

I believe the recommended amount of recycled plastic is around 30% for PLA. Any more and the parts lose significant strength.

I personally would prefer us to accept that plastics aren’t really recyclable. It’s better to move towards renewable plastics like PLA, and treat the waste as biomass (either composted or burnt for energy.

If you pay attention to the footage, the riots are tiny. I think the biggest was around 100 people.

We finally managed to kick the right wing theives out, and some people are less than happy. They managed to rial a few idiots up, and the media have lapped it up.

Edge of tomorrow.

A remarkably good film, considering how badly it was advertised.

The problem is they fit TOO well. We struggle to get either relativity or QM to deviate significantly close to their “realms”. However, neither predicts the existence of the other, and are incompatible in basic ideas about reality.

Basically, we know they don’t align, but we can’t access the middle area, and we can’t find any useful cracks to pry at within the accessible areas. It’s been driving physicists up the wall for decades.

What’s really screwy is you can force light to only travel as a evanescent wave. It’s completely undetectable without a second interaction, but light must transmit energy using the purely imaginary part of the complex wave.

The imaginary component definitely has some physical meaning, it’s not just a useful mathematical trick.

I was more thinking of a properly made Sheppard’s pie, or a beef roast with trimmings.

If you really love our jellied eels though… 🤷‍♂️

I’m fairly sure they only still exist to prank tourists.

We’ve been completely screwed over by the supermarkets on this one. A lot of our base ingredients are now bland and tasteless. This has had a knock on effect.

Good, traditional English food is far from bland and tasteless.

The people who need them, generally are more likely to notice them.

Unfortunately they get overused a lot, as well as poorly used, when they are.

I can remember it fairly quickly. My spacial sense is particularly good. I can easily get a sense of negative space (hidden rooms etc) as well as good predictive skills. My personal problem is when maps get large or don’t overlap. It’s either mapped well, or not. It can take me a while to join up multiple smaller sub maps in my mind. (Think office or stadium sized spaces).

It’s spacially based. It makes more sense in 3D. It’s just as compatible with echolocation as visual data. (The soundscape of a room tells you a LOT about your surroundings). I believe it’s based within my visual system, just stripped of the superfluous visualisations. Interestingly, I can actually map mathematics into the same structures.

I’m doing a piss poor job of explaining it. Language lacks the nuance to describe it well, and I lack the skill to bend it into shape.

I also don’t get dog breeds, just amorphous and blurry blobs with rorsarch like colors slapped on them.

That’s akin to what I get. The core structure is there, but it’s almost a sense of what should be there. It’s akin to seeing things out of the corner of your eye, while overtired. Your brain tells you what it is, and you accept it, it doesn’t necessarily match what you are actually ‘seeing’.

I ‘know’ how dogs move, I ‘know’ their body structure. I can force that down to a single image, but it wants to be so much more. All the senses of ‘dogness’ compressed into a single entity.

Not op, but I have a very weak ability to visualise. The data is more abstracted. A map is a set of spacial connections that define an area. My brain has learnt to pull that from a map. What I can’t do is recall the map to figure out additional information. If my brain didn’t think it was relevant when I looked at it, the information is likely gone.

There are definitely pros and cons to it. I’m not limited to what I could visualise, when thinking. This lets me dig deeper into more complex ideas and patterns. It also makes other tasks a lot harder. I struggle a lot with faces and appearances.

As for the dogs, I have an abstracted “model” in my mind. The size and breed of the dogs is undefined. There are 2 dog entities in my mind. 1 brown, which is quite generic, the other has pink attached to it, that cross links it with poodles etc.

I can personally push it to a visualisation, but it takes significant mental effort, and the results are unstable.

I’ve got both pathways in my brain. Thinking without words is definitely faster. Verbal thought is better for communication and crystallisation of ideas. I.e. I think about something non-verbally, then internally verbalise the conclusions to help fix it in my memory and communicate it.

What’s really screwy is memories survive that process. You can do Pavlov’s dog type training on a caterpillar. The resultant butterfly will still react to the trigger.

The brain goes through a liquid phase, but still manages to maintain its wiring!

The difference between science, and blowing shit up, is in the recording.