Yes fiber doesn’t take you off of ketosis however it does increase carbohydrate absorption.
455 karma · joined March 28, 2016
Interested in: - epistemology - social/financial structures. - startups
No one has disagreed with it, I explicitly agreed with you on the existence of Fermi velocity. I don't have the ability to downvote, but you were downvoted because you mentioned the fermi velocity in contradiction to electron flow even though it is the drift velocity that is pertinent in the original context of electricity (which requires a non-net zero velocity).
I’m familiar with Pauli exclusion principle I’ve worked on real semiconductors.
Your last point is wrong, everything else you said is correct but it remains irrelevant since it does not contradict what was said. Both links are correct.
As you know the net fermi velocity of a fermion is 0. The directional velocity resulting from an electric field on an electron, the fermi velocity which becomes directional due to net flow, is the drift velocity. Which is what we care about.
You can do a simple experiment with NMR to measure the speed of electrons. Indeed they’ve done it and it corresponds to the “wrong calculations”.[1]
Edit: Good resource [2] to help you understand the difference between those two velocities:
> However, the drift velocity of electrons in metals - the speed at which electrons move in applied electric field - is quite slow, on the order of 0.0001 m/s, or .01 cm/s. You can easily outrun an electron drifting in a metal, even if you have been drinking all night and have been personally reduced to a very slow crawl.
> To summarize, electrons are traveling in metals at the Fermi velocity vF, which is very, very fast (106 m/s), but the flux of electrons is the same in all directions. That is, they are going nowhere fast. In an electric field, a very small but directional drift velocity is superimposed on this fast random motion of valence electrons.
[1] https://physics.aps.org/story/v17/st4
[2] https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Inorganic_Chemistry/...
> In fact, electrons in conductive media do not travel at c, they travel at incredibly slow velocities, on the order of a fraction of a millimeter per second. The rate can vary, and the amount of current in the conductor is a function of the average speed of the electrons in it. [1]
[1] https://wiki.c2.com/?SpeedOfElectrons
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drift_velocity
[3] https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/497916/how-fast-...
Savings rate is decreasing not increasing.
The EFFR is exactly incrementally increased in a way to not immediately perturb markets, to slowly approach its target. It is also well known that there is delay expected between prices of all assets (including credit) to react to monetary conditions.
However, epistemologically it might be sound, I've been thinking about this for a while now. Mainly because of the simple potential well problem and considering Hegelian epistemology.
The particle form isn't determined until it is measured, this is okay in regular epistemology and transcendental idealism. Not an issue, all appearances are human activities anyways created by our limited senses and tools.
But the amazing thing is that the particle still complies with our concept of causality despite not yet existing (its probabilities are completely dependent on potential energy)!
There are several theories to try to reconcile this. Real many-worlds theory, holographic universe, superdeterminism, single-electron etc. But all of these have either epistemological issues or cannot account for all phenomena.
This has led me to what I think is the most satisfying interpretation so far, which I call retroactive superdeterminism (RS).
In RS in order to resolve the problem of maintaining causality for an object which does not exist, on information of the appearance of the particle which may otherwise contradict causality, the mind changes the entire history of the world so to be that the particle existed the entire time with defined position and momentum, thereby producing causality. Thereby saving the mental framework we have on all things (phenomenology).
In this way the universe 'learns' but of course it is merely the ensemble of the appearances of the world and their properties that are changing as a result of that mental activity, which from one perspective can be argued that the universe is learning.
For a similar reason an oral TZD (which are selective MPCi) should also help.
[1] https://hscnews.usc.edu/small-molecule-could-make-a-big-diff...
The real challenge with XR is the vergence-accomodation conflict, it's solved in AR but not VR [0].
AR input software is a commodity, open-source versions exist. They use gesture detection.
In the long-term, markets are certainly efficient. However, the period of inefficiency is determined by the absolute quantity of profit dollars available in the market which in itself determines the competition. That is, the quantity of ticks (time) required for a dynamic optimization w.r.t. profit extraction is the measure of competition in some market, and thereby the degree of efficiency.
It is then true, that in the most competitive markets, the ones with the most capital, have a very small window of inefficiency, but they do exist. It requires a lot of capital to dynamically extract profit from those inefficiencies. An example of this would be the near hegemony of Citadel Securities in making markets. It is impossible for anyone today to compete in the market-making (an advanced arbitrage) industry without tons of capital.
However, we are time-bounded beings so there is always present an inefficient market. The challenge of the proprietor is then to determine that market which can provide a return to his constrained capital.
For instance, a restaurant can give a 15% annual ROI, which outperforms the S&P. The Citadel is not going to be interested in this inefficiency because that ROI is unavailable to the amount of capital they're trying to invest. So what we see is that the most competitive markets beget the most capital, because they have the most profit available to extract absolutely; then the most amount of resources, where capital is the analogue, are invested into those markets--so any inefficiency is quickly eroded.
This means that just like the restaurant, there are markets that remain untouched for long periods of time due to their inability to return large amounts of capital in absolute terms. These markets then have a great ROI in terms of percent. It is these markets that are available to the proprietor with low capital.
This is why the startup advice of finding a niche first is so salient, they are always necessarily underserved non-competitive markets. There's the other cycle from crossing-the-chasm which removes enterprises from this market who have the same idea as they scale, that's a separate explication, but this cycle allows the period of inefficiency to be maintained in those markets through that self-regulation.
[1] This is a simplification, the real optimal rate of inflation is really -0.8% as shown in the seminal paper The Optimum Quantity of Money.
Here’s an author theorizing on why people go to festivals TODAY, instead of the obvious answer that they’re a fun social game he creates this entire abstract theory about worship and religion.
https://charleseisenstein.org/essays/girard-series-part-1-th...
What happens in entanglement is that the two entangled objects receive say an entangled photon, it is at this point where the two objects are entangled.
Entanglement is a dance of the statistical limits and position of a particle/object given a specific space/energy configuration (initial condition). From this we know the probability of where it can be, what states it can assume, and the limits of both—given the energy it takes to traverse space and assume those states at once.
They are entangled because once information of the states of one of the entangled objects is measured (mainly by analyzing the exiting photon), we can apodictically discern the state of the other.
This is instead a dysfunctional government approaching anarcho-individualism.