It’s not just the narrow wavelength. Even with a perfectly monochromatic green light, your green receptors would activate a lot but your receptors for red and blue would still activate a bit. These researchers specifically target only the green receptors to activate (by literally shooting light at those receptors in particular), so for the first time ever your brain reads a pure green signal.

It’s a math trick. Not a physical theory.

Any linear relationship in this calculation would be an approximation. They’re useful for intuition and quickly explaining things, but for actual business either the full nonlinear relationship is used, or if the linear approximation is used the approximation error must be bounded by an acceptably small parameter.

Lambda-CDM is fully aware of general relativity. Some people may try to explain it with nonrelativistic pictures to help you build intuition, but the actual theory and calculation is fully relativistic so you don’t have to worry about that.

since we have 2 parameters to evaluate

I don’t follow. What two parameters?

The instrumental error bars are no longer overlapping. But if we imagine all the modifications one could make to Lambda-CDM, then there is still a huge “theory” error bar that subsumes all these.

Basically I’m saying the model is wrong, yes, but it can very much be fixed.

thing I don’t like is on the rise

must be the tankies

Yes it’s a problem with the model. But it a problem that can very likely be fixed. We don’t have to throw out the entire model and start from scratch.

The article over-dramatizes the story. This “deeply wrong” discrepancy is less than 10%. CMB measurements predict a Hubble constant of around 68km/s/Mpc. Distance ladder measurements get around 73km/s/Mpc.

Our current understanding of the universe the Lambda-CDM model is still wildly successful and it’s more likely that the true correct model of the universe will be a correction/extension to Lambda-CDM rather than a completely new theory (although if it is a completely new theory that would be pretty cool).

tariff = (export - import) / (<??? factor> × <another ??? factor that cancels the first one out> × import)

The only times anyone would use the asterisk as multiplication symbol are

• they are doing some fancy math and it’s not the same kind of number multiplication we’re familiar with
• they are on a computer, the keyboard does not have a (×) key, and they don’t know how to typeset it (\times in LaTex), so they just use the asterisk instead

The US government falls in the second category.

Did they end up choosing block list or allow list? I hope it was the former. Allowlist will exclude small instances and harm federation diversity.

The most anticapitalist instance getting a .com domain would be hilarious

But there gotta be more to the story. Was the registrar being “shady” as @[email protected] said? Why did federation take so long?

The link is helpful. Thanks!

Thanks! The link is helpful.

Look like they got the domain back a while ago. Wonder why federation took so long.

Sorry I should have clarified: not looking for Hexbear lore in general. I have seen a lot of Hexbear content, so I have a solid understanding on the site and the users. Don’t want to start a debate about that here because that debate always turn nasty.

What I am looking for is: what happened in the past month-ish? How did you all lost your domain? How and when did you get it back? Why did it take so long for federation to be back? Is there any other change made to the site during this downtime?

I recommend critically reading the paper. It is quite accessible to those with college-level science background.

Most importantly, it is still highly controversial whether this galaxy rotation direction bias actually exists. If you look at section 4 of the paper, the author is debating against different groups that did similar surveys and found no bias. Someone needs to actually work through this author’s methodology as well as those of other groups and figure out what is going on.

If there is indeed a bias, that is super exciting! An anisotropic universe due to being in a black hole would be a very cool explanation. But given the ongoing debate, a general-audience publication like Independent presenting this rotation bias as a given fact is very poor journalism.

Here’s a better media coverage of the same paper https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00030-5

As always, relevant Wikipedia links:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Khwarizmi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithm

And “choose”, of course.