Slatlun

joined 4 years ago
[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago

Yes, and you have to dig deep in some places to get below the frost with your foundation. In those places a basement makes sense because you're digging that far either way. Texas frosts don't get very deep, so you're able to have a shallower foundation making a basement just an extra cost.

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How about gum and flavored water?

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry, I shoul've said. The earth isn't a sphere, ellipsoid, or other regular geometric shape. The ocean's surface is less so and changes by the tides. Those shapes can work to model the surface locally and globally depending on accuracy needed but are inherently flawed.

Person 1: Does that matter? Person 2: No, let's just simplify. Person 1: Ok, well we can really simplify using a Mercator projection. Person 2: You're doing it wrong. We need to simplify the part that makes the line not straight, but not so much that it looks bendy again. Our projection needs to be at the level that makes the answer I want to be true look right. Person 1: Does the question even make any sense in this context then?

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The earth isn't a sphere though. Even if that has less error it is not none. A geodesic path would also not be straight because of the shape of the earth.

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, using lat, long, and radius is better than xyz on the earth - usually. But the radius, the 3rd dimension, changes by where you are because the earth isn't actually a sphere. On this path it would get longer until you reached the equator, shorter until the most southerly point then longer again until you hit NZ. It is a wavy line not a straight one. Again you're projecting 3d onto 2d (because you're incorrectly assuming a fixed radius) and saying that that error in projection doesn't matter.

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

My point is that exactly. We live and move in 3D space, so the line has to be judged in 3 dimensions. You might as well say any curved line on a 2D map looks curved, but if you look at it in 1D it is perfectly straight

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago (18 children)

The problem is that "straight" on the surface of a globe is a curve. The map projection (how you flatten out a globe) makes that look even weirder no matter how it is done. Is any route on the surface of a globe a straight line? Does the initial question even make sense?

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Wow, that's great!

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It's so small! I wouldn't have expected it to fruit that quick. How many years had it been since you took/rooted the cutting?

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Yep, 100% reuse of all wastewater and solids!

[–] Slatlun@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nice work on the write up! It is hard sorting things out when they're half true. For me, drinking water is especially important to get the fact straight on because of how bad it can go if the system fails. It would be silly to disregard anyone saying water wasn't up to a safe standard, but separating things I would care about out from the fluoride and chlorine background noise is tricky. Thanks for the deeper dive!

view more: ‹ prev next ›