interdimensionalmeme

Don't steal the government does not tolerate competition

They're like regular people who don't know our entire tech stack is fully sodomized by glowies. Basically every electronic object in your house is permasnitching your business to the state should and their vampite friends

I asked chatgpt and the answer is inconclusive

Does quantum foam occasionally spawn a new big bang ?

The idea of "quantum foam" occasionally spawning a new Big Bang is an intriguing concept, but it belongs more to speculative physics than established science, at least with our current understanding of cosmology. Quantum Foam:

Quantum foam (or spacetime foam) refers to a concept derived from quantum mechanics and general relativity. It was first proposed by physicist John Wheeler in the 1950s. The basic idea is that on extremely small scales, close to the Planck length (~1.6 × 10⁻³⁵ meters), spacetime is not smooth but fluctuates wildly due to quantum uncertainty. This is because, in quantum theory, at these incredibly small scales, particles and even spacetime itself undergo constant, random fluctuations, resulting in a "foamy" structure. Quantum Foam and Big Bangs:

The speculation that quantum foam might give rise to new universes or Big Bang-like events is tied to broader ideas in theoretical physics, including concepts like quantum cosmology, eternal inflation, and multiverse theories.

Quantum Fluctuations and Universe Creation: In some models of the universe, it is proposed that quantum fluctuations could give rise to entire universes. This is somewhat similar to how quantum fluctuations in energy can spontaneously create particles for brief moments (due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle). Some cosmologists have extended this thinking, suggesting that a fluctuation in the quantum foam could create a new region of spacetime that expands and becomes a new universe—a new Big Bang, in essence. This is related to the idea of the multiverse, where new universes are constantly being generated through different mechanisms, including quantum fluctuations.

Eternal Inflation: Another theory that links the idea of new Big Bangs with quantum processes is the theory of eternal inflation, which proposes that our universe is just one "bubble" in a larger multiverse. In this model, the universe experiences a rapid expansion (inflation) in its early stages, and in some regions, this inflation never stops. Small regions of spacetime can "bubble off" from this eternally inflating space and form new universes with their own Big Bang events.

Cyclic or Bounce Models: There are also cyclic models of the universe (such as the ekpyrotic universe or conformal cyclic cosmology) where a universe goes through repeated cycles of expansion and contraction. In these models, the quantum foam might play a role in transitioning from one cycle to the next, though these are still speculative ideas.

Does Quantum Foam Directly Spawn Big Bangs?

Currently, the connection between quantum foam and the creation of new Big Bangs remains speculative and unproven. Our understanding of quantum gravity—the theory that would fully unify quantum mechanics and general relativity—is still incomplete. Many of the ideas related to the quantum foam, multiverses, or eternal inflation remain theoretical and lack direct empirical evidence.

While quantum foam might offer an intriguing arena for considering the birth of new universes, there is no definitive evidence that quantum foam occasionally spawns new Big Bangs, at least according to current mainstream physics. In Summary:

Quantum foam describes the hypothetical, fluctuating nature of spacetime on extremely small scales. Some speculative theories in physics suggest that quantum foam or related processes could, in principle, give rise to new universes (possibly via quantum fluctuations or other mechanisms). These ideas are part of multiverse theories or eternal inflation models but remain speculative and are not established as fact. The idea of quantum foam spawning Big Bangs is fascinating but is still in the realm of theoretical and speculative physics.

Scientific advancement, especially in quantum gravity and cosmology, might eventually give us more insights into whether such processes could occur.

I can attest, this is playing in my head right now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iR-K2rUP86M

Yeah, it will eventually break, anything external is not ideal. Youtube seems like the only reasonnable option but it's so tedious, they ask a bunch of question and it is going to break some day. Some day youtube will break external viewings from other websites.

Ok, I tried

This created a file too big

ffmpeg -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a copy -f mp4 "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp4"

This recompress to 64kbit, but still a few byte over the limit

ffmpeg -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 64k -f mp4 "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.64kbit.mp4"

This was under the limit, but when uploaded, the file disappeared with no error message

ffmpeg -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 56k -f mp4 "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.56kbit.mp4"

I tried copy to mp4 but trunkate a 30seconds, same behaviour as 56kbit file, despite being under 500k

ffmpeg -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -t 30 -c:v copy "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.30secs.mp4"

I tried adding an image, but this just created a 1 second file with no image

ffmpeg -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -i "image(62)-2.png" -c:a aac -b:a 64k -c:v libx264 -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.56kbit.withpic.mp4"

This next one loops the image file, now it created the full song with an image in the video channel. Unfortunately the video track now weights about 3 megabytes, so way over

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 64k -c:v libx264 -shortest -vf "scale=1280:720" "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.56kbit.withpic.mp4"

This next one created a 2.4mbps file, the image is now awful quality

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 64k -c:v libx264 -b:v 100k -vf "scale=320:320" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.56kbit.withpic.mp4"

This reduces video bandwidth to 10kbps, image is incomprehensible and the file is still 1.3 megabytes (400k for the video stream)

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 64k -c:v libx264 -b:v 10k -vf "scale=320:320" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.56kbit.withpic.mp4"

Reduced video stream to 1kbps, 1.2 megabytes, still too big

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 64k -c:v libx264 -b:v 1k -vf "scale=320:320" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.56kbit.withpic.mp4"

I reduced audio quality to 32kbps, 677 kilobytes, half of that is the video stream still, and at this point it's just a gray image

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 32k -c:v libx264 -b:v 1k -vf "scale=320:320" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.32kbit.withpic.mp4"

And I post it here And the uploaded file just disappears .....

I try raising the video quality then the resolution

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 32k -c:v libx264 -b:v 10k -vf "scale=320:320" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.32kbit.withpic.mp4"

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 32k -c:v libx264 -b:v 20k -vf "scale=480:480" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.32kbit.withpic.mp4"

final attempt, I'm not sure why it won't accept it, no errors, it is under 1 megabyte

ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "image(62)-2.png" -i "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.mp3" -c:a aac -b:a 32k -c:v libx264 -b:v 20k -vf "scale=1280:720" -shortest "Somebody I Vacuum to Decay.32kbit.withpic.mp4"

Thanks I liked "Time is Money (Not actually in the style of the B-52s. Was just the last style prompt I used, lol)" it feels true.

Yes, it does seem posting the whole ready made mp4 is easier than starting from a sound file.

I think it's because all the tech bros forgot that just because you can have a video track doesn't mean sound files are useless !

Well, I do want to figure out my own music visualization engine. One of my friend was a collector of those karaoke songs and he had a big suite of cool music visualisation software to go with it. I'd going to try and dig this up.

here

and another example that ~~it also does sound just fine~~, there was no sound actually, weird So no sound of any kind on lemmy ?

I was curious, what that looks like when he does come

I wanted to just post an mp3 file to Lemmy. But it doesn't work I remembered there was a website called "bandcamp" I tried that You had to go through the whole rigamarole of creating an account then you upload the file but no, it wants a flac file not an mp3 and it wants a title image, but 1024x1024 is not good enough, it's minimum 1400x1400 so I just upscale my image in some other software

and finally I could post, the link to a bandcamp, that apparently is only good for 200 playback ?! And they probably have ads and stuff too and are going to get people to subscribe and whatnot

All that just to post an mp3 file like I did here

https://lemmy.ml/post/21313857/14254237

Why doesn't Lemmy just take mp3 files when it does mp4 video files ?! It's weird and annoying !

Right here buddy

https://testaccountpleaseignore.bandcamp.com/track/somebody-i-vacuum-to-decay

https://testaccountpleaseignore.bandcamp.com/track/somebody-i-vacuum-to-decay-1

Posting music Lemmy is very very hard btw