I know, that’s why I said it’s entirely different.

But also, we don’t know exactly how time dilation works. We know it does, because it makes sense mathematically and we have experienced it in applications, but we don’t really know how it works.

FWIW our current understanding of spacetime includes multi-dimensional time, which is why we experience more or less time when we are traveling at high speed or experiencing strong gravitational fields. It’s sort of like moving diagonally across a room, except entirely different.

I came here to say, that’s basically the subplot of Dr Horrible.

It’s not about making money, it’s about taking money… Destroying the status quo, because the status is not quo. The world is a mess and I just need to rule it.

Do vultures do something other than what other birds do? Because most birds regurgitate food for the chicks to eat.

Sure, but you’re equivocating two things that aren’t the same. Until you’ve written infinity 9s, you haven’t written the number yet. Once you do, the number you will have written will be exactly the number 1, because they are exactly the same. The difference between all the nines you could write in one thousand lifetimes and 0.999… is like the difference between a cup of sand and all of spacetime.

Or think of it another way. Forget infinity for a moment. Think of 0.999… as all the nines. All of them contained in the number 1. There’s always one more, right? No, there isn’t, because 1 contains all of them. There are no more nines not included in the number 1. That’s why they are identical.

It is physically equal to 1. Infinity goes on forever, and so there is no physical difference.

It’s not that it makes almost no difference. There is no difference because the values are identical. There is no infinity between the two values.

In a manner of speaking, yes.

See, the church of Scientology cloned Tom years ago, and rolls out a new “stunt double” for each movie to make sure that his productions are done on time. If one Tom falls during a stunt, a new one is released.

Unfortunately, due to a clerical error, the original Tom was mislabelled before being put back in his tank, so it’s unclear which one was the first. This led to several Toms being accidentally left out, allowing this picture to be taken and forcing the church to pretend that they are different people and give them each a fake identity under which to live out their natural lives.

Except it isn’t infinitesimally smaller at all. 0.999… is exactly 1, not at all less than 1. That’s the power of infinity. If you wanted to make a wooden board exactly 0.999… m long, you would need to make a board exactly 1 m long (which presents its own challenges).

Coincidentally, but entirely unrelated, nobody ever legally watched any Comedy Central, CMT, or MTV content ever again.

No. Stop it. There is no difference between those two crimes because of the inherent power disparity between police and detainees.

Yes, if an officer uses their position of authority to take money that doesn’t belong to them, it is theft. If they use the threat of imprisonment to have sex with someone, that’s rape. This isn’t complicated. It doesn’t matter if the bribe was offered or solicited, the officer is either using force to have non-consensual sex or taking something that doesnt belong to them. It doesn’t matter if there was an actual quid pro quo agreement, or if the officer was planning to continue to deliver the detainee to jail. It doesn’t matter at all if the detainee is guilty, and it’s disgusting to suggest that it does so you should stop that.

How is it not force when placing someone under arrest, putting them in the back of a locked police car, and driving them to the police station for booking?

If a police officer took money in exchange for their detainee’s freedom, then yes that is absolutely robbery. There is always the implicit threat of violence and imprisonment when someone is under arrest. To refuse a police officer while in custody is to risk your own safety and life. Under those conditions, there can be no version of consent thatmitigates the crime.

You don’t understand how a quick death is better than a lifetime of torture and an eventual slow death?

It’s not like there is a pack of gang-raping waterboarding guys waiting outside the cancer wards waiting to waterboard and gang rape all the cancer survivors. If there were, there might be a few who don’t fight cancer as hard.

That’s not an ad hominem. I’m not dismissing your argument because of who you are. I’m saying you’re being naive in your expectations of what the police can and will do. And if you actually do believe that an arresting officer who is willing to fuck a detainee will be constrained by legal limits to their power, then I really don’t know how to respond to that.

Oh, you sweet summer child. Never change, the world needs your optimism.

Not peacefully, no. But instantaneous death beats a lot of the other variations of unconscionable suffering visited upon factory farm animals.

A human would be aware of what is happening, and the size difference would mean you would need a much larger machine than that to instantaneously destroy an entire person. But if you had to choose between instantaneous obliteration and a slow, torturous existence, some people might actually choose the instant death.

Considering the chicks don’t know what’s coming, it’s probably not a terrible way to go. It’s gruesome, but it’s over in an instant. Factory farming in general is a horror show, and this is one of the least inhumane ways animals are killed for profit.

Yes, in your hypothetical situation, she raped him. Rape is rape. It’s nonconsensual sex. Detainees cannot give consent to sex because there is always the inherent threat of violence and imprisonment.

It’s akin to slavery. Slaves cannot consent to sex, either.

That’s not an argument in defense of rape, that’s a reason to expand the legal definition to align with the reality of the situation.

Anyone who is empowered to take away all freedom from an individual cannot have consensual sex with that individual. Whether explicit or not, there is always the threat of force when a police officer has someone in custody. It is not possible to consent to sex under those circumstances. It is always rape.

I appreciate that! TIL