Maven (famous)@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 7 months agoRulelemmy.worldimagemessage-square49fedilinkarrow-up1631arrow-down10
arrow-up1631arrow-down1imageRulelemmy.worldMaven (famous)@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 7 months agomessage-square49fedilink
minus-squareMaven (famous)@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up15·7 months agoI’m not convinced 100% isn’t shrunk in some way
minus-squareHerbal Gamer@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up6·7 months ago104% looks a lot more natural.
minus-squarekey@lemmy.keychat.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·7 months agoSurely the real one is at least 106.
minus-squareRiccosuave@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·7 months agoIt’s a beautiful and mysterious problem of mathematics. One that may change simply by observing the system. Charlie Kirk’s face size may be the key to understanding quantum mechanics.
I’m not convinced 100% isn’t shrunk in some way
104% looks a lot more natural.
Surely the real one is at least 106.
It’s a beautiful and mysterious problem of mathematics. One that may change simply by observing the system. Charlie Kirk’s face size may be the key to understanding quantum mechanics.