Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)FR
Posts
0
Comments
29
Joined
10 mo. ago

  • With one layer the case is simple. There is a certain light energy at which the conversion of light to current occurs called gap energy. If the light energy is lower than that no conversion can happen and if the light energy is higher the extra energy is converted to heat and only gap energy remains.

    Filtering UV would be a loss but a small one.

  • I'm on the otters side here, semiconductors make no sense. For example the Fermi-Energy is supposed to be in the middle of the band gap but how that's just idiotic. Fermi-Energy is the point up to that we fill electrons but inside the bandgap are no states. Like defining the properties of an electron that doesn't exist.

  • I never understood BRICS. Sure, they are the second line of industrial powers (China?) but especially India Russia and China hate each other to the bone. They are partners only on paper. If someone can explain it to me please go on .

  • I sadly don't understand these units and your point is drained in it. The point I want to make is that the "force" of vacuum is limited by the difference of pressures.

    You say it changes "drasticly" with area or suction but that is untrue. It changes linearly with area (not drastically) and pressure difference has a maximum. The maximum is defined by the pressure of the vacuum(=0) and the pressure of the ambient air (1 arm). Both are constant so the maximum is constant and actually not that big.

  • The difference between ambient pressure and inner pressure is always smaller than ambient pressure. Delta p is therefore limited. The force comes from Delta p times contact area which is constant.

    I sadly don't know your units of mass but as I said a perfect vacuum over an area such as the Bowl is as strong as a muscle. The Ravioli will in no world produce a strong vacuum so muscle will win in most cases.

  • The pressure acts over the area of contact. For a perfect vacuum it would lead to ~1kN of force. This is the same order of magnitude our muscles produce. If you take into account that the vacuum results from cooling over such a small temperature interval the force can't be too high.

  • I played and enjoyed both. They feel very different. Divinity was built without the pen and paper foundation and solasta is very true to DnD 5e. While 5e is nice for roleplay where in theory everything is possible, it lacks in a videogame setting. I don't go into detail here but in all DOS2 feels more like a complete game that isn't hold back by sticking to a rulebook that was designed for something else.

    As already mentioned, DOS2 also has premade Characters on with the story builds. Solasta focuses on 'White Canvas' characters which I like.

  • I'm waiting for the BaldursGate3 update but until then I grabbed solasta. Also DnD based and more chill than BG3 but very fun. I love that you can design and play a whole party instead of just the "main char" like BG3.

  • It looks like a strategy game but actually isn't. The strategy part just isn't developed enough. It's a story and RPG style game with a strong focus on economy management. The game discourages strategy by telling you how strong an army is (as a number) and giving you no tactical option. Meaning higher numbers will always win.

    The (new) DLCs are mostly very bad and short so the game as a whole is in a strange state where you can play a good game with missing features without DLC or you play a bad game with lots of features that is very expensive with all the DLC.

    I kinda hope that the game dies soon because the frequent game breaking updates and optional (and disadvantages) DLC makes modding annoying even though there are extremely fun mods, even better than the DLC.

  • The normal lead we know but still special. Is the last stable element in the PSE and there is the theory that it's actually radioactive (unstable) but the decay is so slow that we probably never see a single atom of it decaying.

  • I always wondered what would happen if you cite an original source of something we consider common sense now. What would nature say if you use conservation of momentum and cite Isaac Newton and the Principia Mathematica.

    What if you quote something in latin. For most of science history this was completely normal.

  • Yes. Every now and then we get a paper claiming that they found a HTSC. It always is a big deal because they are considered the holy grail of solid state physics. Later we find that it's a mistake.

    We are pretty good though. Records are in the area of −135 °C (138K, -211°F) but the phenomenon was thought to be at a few Kelvin max in the last century.

    The big BUT is that it's science. Meaning that it is not granted that such a material (superconducting at ambient temperature and pressure) even exists

  • I would say "High Temperatur Superconductor". If they can be made cheaply, they solve our Energy Problems in almost every way. Turbines will become more effective, Transport of Energy cheap and lossless and storage crazy effective. They will also revolitionize meassurement of magnetic fields witch will have a huge impact on medicin and other fields.