hvgotcodes

hvgotcodes t1_jdiqsjw wrote

According to GR no, once inside the event horizon the singularity is no longer a point in space, it is a point in time. It is unavoidable, just like “next Wednesday” is unavoidable. The matter that composed the neutron star must collapse and encounter the singularity at some point in its future.

More speculative theories offer other solutions. String Theory, for example, proposes “Fuzz Balls”, so called because the event horizon would be “fuzzy” at the smallest scales. The interior of the BH would be a degenerate matter composed of the fundamental strings, not empty space. Obviously very speculative.

We need a theory of Quantum Gravity to better understand the interior of a BH.

11

hvgotcodes t1_jbotelc wrote

I have an SRF ribeye fillet that I was going to try a reverse sear on. Usually I do my fillets to 90 and then sear 90 seconds a side, and it ends up in the 130s after a rest. So I might reverse sear to 100 before the sear for the ribeye fillet.

12

hvgotcodes t1_jbo1pb3 wrote

How’d you cook it? Looks pretty good, if not slightly uneven, but I can’t do any better.

Ribeye is the only steak I like closer to medium. 137 is perfect so the fat becomes more palatable.

109

hvgotcodes t1_ist4rvw wrote

Clickbait Bullshit.

Quantum computing is never “taking over”. It is only beneficial for specific types of problems. It will make those problems solvable, in the sense that classical computers can’t solve these problems in useful time, ever, in theory (no matter how fast our classical computer is, it can never solve this specific type of problem in reasonable time, although it can solve any problem a quantum computer can given enough time).

So there will always be “classical computers”, for all the problems except the specific types that require quantum computers.

26