with the ubiquity of photo editing, and ai driven video manipulation, i'd argue one can contest images too(i):
>> Ghost in the Shell addressed this issue in 2005(o)
>> The Tachikoma units are debating how to stop a nuclear strike and one suggests that broadcasting a live feed of the nuclear sub would help, but the idea is reasoned against due to the technological capabilities to fake such a feed:
>> "Pictures don't prove anything anymore. It would just end up as a source of amusement for the uninvolved masses, an image from an unknown source that showed up at an all too convenient time."
>> beyond this inflection point one must now trust both the content and the source
there are a couple definitions you would need to elaborate on to realise this question fully
by particle physicists usually mean any electromagnetic phenomena that seems to have distinct energy levels and so can refer to any number of things depending on context: photons, electrons, protons, atoms(o)
as for interact, what do you mean by this? would you consider entanglement an 'interaction'? the idea of a wavefunction is basically that every particle is 'interacting' with every other particle in existence in every direction with potential of collisions being discernible by the probabilities of the particle's position being spread out ad inifinitum
according to relativity light has a constant speed, meaning it is always moving at 'c'
since the photon is moving it has energy and though it has a 'rest' mass of 0 it is without a rest frame because it is always moving at that constant speed and so always has some measurable mass
because of this even in a universe with only a single photon without anything to interact with the photon would still affect spacetime
if you remove the 'only' from your question then the answer is an emphatic yes because you yourself are a collection of 'particles' 'interacting' and you are affecting spacetime
> by particle physicists usually mean .. photons, electrons, protons, atoms(o)
I meant pretty much anything that can be described by wave function evolving according to Schrodinger equation.
> as for interact, what do you mean by this?
Exchange of energy through any of 3 physical forces (not gravity). So not entanglement.
Single photon universe would never be observed so it would have wave function but never have specific location so according to my idea it would not affect spacetime.
seems logical.. i would argue the inflection point in the ubiquity of pooled compute services came as bandwidth needs increased due to more businesses interacting directly, remotely and in real time, with customers, be they consumers or other businesses
if compute needs were all internal, as they are with desktop apps.. namely, compilation.., and with the majority of computationally expensive machine learning demands.. namely, training.. then i'd argue the pooled compute model would have remained niche
even more mystic in its infancy when it was an abbreviated phone number you would call, hold up the phone mic near the source, get hung up on and then recieve a txt with your song title and artist.. in 2002
> The description that General Relativity puts forth ... needs to be augmented to include an uncertain position that has a probability distribution to it.
i am sorry but 'needs' is too strong here
quantisation(o) was established before, necessarily so, probability was introduced to explain the behaviour of electromagnetic phenomena
to claim that probability is necessary for quantisation seems to have it reversed
the current understanding is both unknown whether gravity is quantised but also whether probability is necessary to describe quantum behaviour
with current understanding the only thing one can say with certainty is that requiring probability is a result of the math used to best model quantum behaviour of electromagnetic phenomena, namely fourier analysis(i)
it can be a supernatural feeling.. paddling hard until the moment the wave picks you up and says, 'i got you from here' and just carries you off
when picking a board you should know the bigger the board the more stable it will be and the more forgiving it will be as you stand up, ~40-60cm taller than yourself is a good rough metric for a medium sized board, you can start bigger and as you get better try smaller and smaller boards
i have been body surfing and boogie boarding since i was a kid so, unfortunately, i am unable to give you any good tips on picking a good wave and figuring out the timing, but i think this may be a skill that can develop on its own with time
as for the surf.. the best advice i can give:
1) when waiting for a wave: stay on your board; the more time you spend on the board the more intimately you will get to know it and the more you will develop your stabilizing muscles and core
2) when paddling for a wave: arch your back as much as you can to lift your chest off the board; it will look like the 'bhujangasana'(o), or 'cobra', yoga pose and this helps to keep the board level in the water and allows for more strength in your paddles
3) when standing up: look down at the board to ensure you place your feet in the center; early on i had the tendency to look up at the shoreline and would place a foot a bit off center and the board would flip
4) when standing up: bend your knee and plant your back foot first; early on it was more natural for me to plant my front foot first but bending your knee and planting your back first ensures your center of mass is directly above your foot
5) once stood up: keep your knees bent; this keeps your leg muscles activated allowing for better balance and control
with the ubiquity of photo editing, and ai driven video manipulation, i'd argue one can contest images too(i):
>> Ghost in the Shell addressed this issue in 2005(o) >> The Tachikoma units are debating how to stop a nuclear strike and one suggests that broadcasting a live feed of the nuclear sub would help, but the idea is reasoned against due to the technological capabilities to fake such a feed: >> "Pictures don't prove anything anymore. It would just end up as a source of amusement for the uninvolved masses, an image from an unknown source that showed up at an all too convenient time." >> beyond this inflection point one must now trust both the content and the source
(o) https://youtu.be/yAoj3AskFMI
(i) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16522643