Yeah, I palm mash out my comments on all your articles.
(it's also neat how the face on the printed sculpture is that of the guy holding it)
I wonder how accurate this is.
Seems pretty good. It'd be somewhere between 1-2 seconds.
I've always been used to thinking of the speed of light as instantaneous. But yeah, what happens in that gif would be instantaneous by any human definition. It's just weird to actually be able to track the movement, y'know? I've never been able to visualize it until now.
Aren't Dustin Hoffman and Al Pacino the same person to begin with? I guess by Star Trek logic, Pacino would be the one with the goatee.
And the best for last:
E C DUB
E C DUB
In practicality for a lot of things you can assume it accurate, like a good popular science trick is measuring the speed of sound using a visual indicator of the sound happening a known distance away and a stopwatch. When it's well established in your headbrain that it really isn't, lots of stuff in science fiction will probably piss you off with it. One of the last films I watched, for example, has a shockwave that moved so fast in a solar system that it could only be travelling many times the speed of light. But fuck Star Trek before JJ Abrams I guess.
Another fun, similar, thing to this is relativity. How space and time are inescapably unified.
Yeah you or somebody said once. You should watch videos of Brian Cox talking shit about Physics.
It's funny because I've often been unsure which people have talked about.
And that last .gif has a spelling error.