Very interestingly, they found that systems with fewer planets tend to exit their “ejection” phase after about 100 million years, but systems with 10 planets are still unstable even after a billion years. They also found that these more bountiful systems actually eject the majority of their planets, losing 70 percent after a billion years. Most of the ones ejected are lower-mass, as expected.
Wonder how many sibling planets we had when our solar system first formed. This sort of topic is always fascinating to me.
Would a regular asteroid be able to wobble the earth as described in this article? Or is it just black holes that should do so?
I seem to remember reading that primordial black holes weren’t yet a proven phenomenon and I have trouble imagining them myself. Wouldn’t they have hawking radiation too which we would be able to detect?
D&D might be a soulless product of middling quality because it is so corporatized now that they refuse to take risks or even release an actually new edition for their big anniversary, but they changed a word so we need to celebrate them.
All the while games like Fabula Ultima don’t even have the concept of race or species and you can define it via a quirk if you feel there is something important to distinguish your character. Lancer doesn’t even ask the question and just wants you to define what your character is good at. And yea the default setting of lancer only has humans, but it’s also a post-scarcity hyper future where people can change their genes and looks with great ease.
But we didn’t read those games and in the TTRPG space, only talking about D&D gets clicks, so this had to be about D&D.
It’s ridiculous that the author thinks they can tell other games to follow D&D when they’ve only looked at D&D. Not only does this update lag well behind most TTRPGs, it doesn’t actually bring it up to date - species has its own issue of being inaccurate in a game rampant with half-lineages, which is why other games moved to terms like lineage and ancestry instead. These are discussions people have had because of the problems of D&D, it hasn’t been a trailblazer since the release of 3.0.
I thought the torus shape was the accepted theory? Guess I haven’t been keeping up on this.
Near the bottom of the article they mention that if the universe wasn’t flat, we would see multiple copies of the universe in the sky. I’m not sure that is exactly true? Given the speed at which the universe is expanding, especially during the early period after the big bang, it seems reasonable that the light from most stars wouldn’t have had a chance to loop back around yet. Even the light from the earliest stars is just reaching us, so I don’t know why they think it would have had time to loop back around multiple times, unless there’s something I’m missing?
And nothing in the article really touched on the “holes” mentioned in the title. Are they referring to the center of a torus, which isn’t really a hole that we could observe? I don’t get it.
If Constellation on Apple TV is right, then it’s an indication that the person has become quantum entangled with their alternative self in another universe.
Good show btw if you are looking for something more psychological with a sci-fi background.
I flat out don’t accept the notion that some starts have no planets. As far as I am concerned, if we have 8 major plantes and on average, 40% of planets are ejected, we should assume the average number of starting planets is 11.
This is like saying, “If a carbon atom has 12 electrons, and on average it forms 4 covalent bonds, we should assume all atoms start with 16 electrons.”
What if dark matter is some form of black hole or exotic ultra dense material made entirely out of the missing antimatter, which for whatever reason doesn’t otherwise interact with electromagnetism? 2 birds, 1 stone.
scientificamerican.com
Ważne