101 reputation
2
bio website potswa.blogspot.com
location
age 30
visits member for 6 months
seen May 16 at 13:34

I post on Google Groups and Usenet using my real name, David Krauss.


Sep
24
awarded  Autobiographer
May
14
comment A black “superhole” possibility?
@frodeborli No, the closer you get to the singularity, the harder it rips you apart. Imaginative, but whatever you're thinking of is not a black hole.
May
14
comment How many black holes exist?
Supermassive black holes in particular? Why the supermassive tag?
May
14
comment A black “superhole” possibility?
"As this matter continues to travel down the gravity well, the tidal effects of gravity will average out" — due to what? They just get stronger and stronger up to the singularity. Also, I don't think this is on-topic for this site because none of it is observable. Physics would be a better forum.
May
14
comment Can Mercury hit Earth or Mars in the next 5 billion years?
@Gerald That would essentially be capture as a moon. The Wikipedia article's elaboration seems to be referring to a cause of instability, not an outcome. Probably what they meant is an integer resonance, say 49:1. But none of the sources are clear about what's supposedly normal and what's risky, and it's hard to trust the numerical accuracy of just one simulation code.
May
12
comment Can Mercury hit Earth or Mars in the next 5 billion years?
A 1:1 orbital resonance would imply that they have the same orbital period, i.e. year length. Obviously that's not possible. In conclusion, Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
May
12
awarded  Supporter
May
11
comment Is the moon only 60 pixels?
This is wrong. According to the Nyquist sampling theorem‌​, to model a waveform with a frequency cutoff, you should sample at twice the cutoff and then low-pass filter the reconstructed result. In other words, it's a 120x120 image blurred according to the ideal point spread function in the illustration.
May
11
comment Is the moon only 60 pixels?
Pausing a video will reveal either VHS or digital compression artifacts. "Sub-pixel" eye vibrations would already be accounted for in any visual acuity test. Taking advantage of atmospheric lensing, or moments of good seeing, is the domain of adaptive optics and I wouldn't assume the brain is capable of that sort of processing.