Why this game uses so much cpu and ram and the global conspiracy

According to the geological record, the earth is in fact due for at least a mini ice age. It is for this reason alone that all my laptops and my server run in various pools; not for the money, I simply don't want to freeze to death.

For what it's worth, I ran DSO in a sandbox and couldn't find any mining activity. I also put my primary laptop behind an enterprise class IPS and nothing nefarious hit the wire that I could see. If they are using the java client for mining, they are doing a pretty good job of hiding it.

That said, if its happening and I missed it, I really want an "Opt In" check box allowing them to utilize my hardware resources in exchange for ander. That would be a respectable business practice in my opinion and one I could get behind.

 

Pretty false sentence, even if maybe not yet proved with all the evidences that would represent a trump proof. Really superficial for sure.

Natural cycling of climate changes always took million years to produce the same (or the opposite) effects that now - in simultaneous with the human presence - are happening in just a some dozen of years. Coincidence? LOL.

Do not see at least the strong possibility of a strict correlation between such two facts, means to be blind, deaf and even a bit more

But on the other hand there are also those who believe that the Earth is flat, in spite of the fact that always flying in the same direction returns to the starting point. So it becomes permissible to even believe that the greenhouse effect formed by the overproduction of carbon dioxide and fine dust deriving from human activities (that's a proven fact) is just a veil of haze around our almost former planet.

 

Pull the trigger!!

You know why physicists and mathematicians are not afraid if someone proves their theories are wrong?
Because they know there is always possibility to enhance a theory ... or if the theory shows to be wrong they would be happy to solve another mathematical puzzle. Unlike the the globalists who attach you a "tinfoil" every time you disagree with them.
Humans produce a very small fraction of the total CO2 ... volcanos in example are producing more CO2 than all human activities put together. Earth's vegetation is producing a huge amount of CO2. But the biggest producers of CO2 by far are the oceans.
Once again there is no proof that CO2 is causing a global warming. Scientists are divided ... some are going this way some are going that way. That is a single biggest proof that no one has a solid evidence that CO2 is a cause of the warming.
Global warming is not a science it is a business ... we will know the truth once we switch to other fuels than fossil fuels.
After all ... humans haven't even explored the planet we are living on. We don't know what is under our own feet, oceans remain unexplored, not all lands of the planet are explored ... yet "we know everything" about the space and global warming

Corporate fascism it is.
Corporations are running governments and the governments are killing and oppressing the people for benefit of the corporations.

You must be the only earthling to have that proof ... since no one else has it ... nor anyone has ever claimed they know the answer
I have a suggestion ... since you ... as established scientist have proof for Big Bang ... implement it with a Black Hole.
Not to mention that the Big Bang is a guess on how our universe has been created ... in a time when scientists are talking multiverse.

Cut the crap man
What steam reforming what BS? As I said that method is used ONLY at oil production plants ... the same plants that are producing fossil fuel.
What planet are you living on? On my planet the "hydrogenation" has already started. Japan, China, Germany and many other countries are already turning from oil to Hydrogen ... that is why Uncle Sam is so pissed off lately

 

But the CO2 produced by plants or oceans is part of the cycle, it's not the problem, since that CO2 is going to be absorbed either by the oceans(oceans are the biggest absorbers of CO2, not plants) or by plants, removing the carbon from the atmosphere

But the burning of fossil fuels by humans is pumping more carbon into the cycle, putting more CO2 into the atmosphere, using the carbon that was previously removed from the atmosphere and the cycle, that remained under the earth, immobile

That excess of CO2 is causing the warming and it is destabilizing the cycle, by for example reducing CO2 solubility, which is a result of growing temperature, in addition to disrupting the population of phytoplancton, that absorb CO2
But it is called climate change, it leads to extreme weather, more powerful storms, longer draughts and draughts kill plant life
And that is happening across the world

Scientists are divided yes, between the vast majority of scientists who actually do science and the shills for oil companies, which are the small minority

Nobody claims we know everything about space, actually they claim the opposite
And Earth compared to just the solar system is much more known, we only know a tiny fraction of the solar system
And we know what lies below the earth, below there is the mantle, which is heated rock under pressure and below the the outer core, which is molten iron and nickel, responsible for the earth magnetic field and then there is the inner core, solid iron and nickel

Yes and what do you think it is? It's called capitalism, neo liberal free market capitalism
Corporate fascism is exactly that, capitalists and right wingers change the name to try to distance themselves to fascism, it fails unfortunately for them with people who know how it works

But science doesn't work on proofs and such, they do not prove mathematical theorems or propositions, they search for empirical, experimental evidence and then try to come up with a model that fits the evidence and the language it uses is mathematics
Scientific models are mathematic and infact they can be used to predict results in addition to explaining the empirical evidence found

The big bang is simply the best model that explains the evidence, like the background radiation and other things
And it is the result of mathematical equations
You don't disprove theories in science, you replace them with better theories, better theories explain more evidence than the worse theories and can predict more things

The multiverse is just an hypothesis, it's not a scientific theory

And why do you think it is used? because it's the less energy consuming method of producing Hydrogen
You can't replace fossil fuels with hydrogen in electric power stations, because Hydrogen is not an energy producer, it's a energy vector, it requires energy to be produced
You'll still need to produce energy somehow to produce hydrogen
You can simply have hydrogen cars, but you have to produce hydrogen
If you have to use either steam reforming or burning fossil fuels in electrict plants to produce the energy required to produce hydrogen, CO2 production will still continue

You have to simply shift energy production to nuclear power( either using fission, using uranium thorium and radioactive waste and possibly fusion if they manage to harness it to produce more energy than it consumes) and renewable energy sources( solar, wind, geothermal, ecc.)

 

That is why the humanity is not advancing ... because of "knowledgeable" people like you
At first I thought you are narrow-minded ... but now i see you are just ignorant.

 

Yeah right, i am ignorant, whereas you do not know the meaning of scientific theory, you don't know the scientific method and you think evolution and the big bang were "disproven"

 

Actually the big bang is not a very popular theory among cosmologists and astronomers these days. Many of the leading scientists seem to think that the universe has always existed and is infinite. That is apparently a popular theory these days. Anyway no one knows what happened or when it happened or whether it even happened at all.

As for evolution... well, some say Charles Darwin recanted his theory on his deathbead. We don’t actually know if that story was true or not but who knows, it could very well be since many sources tell us that Darwin was conflicted for most of his life between Christianity and atheism. But anyway, there’s no point arguing about science because all of these ideas are just theories. None of them has been proven. Maybe creationists are right, maybe evolutionists are right. From a scientific standpoint, no one knows. That’s the nature of science for you.

 

Basically, you are saying is... Reality's an illusion, the universe is a hologram and buy gold?

 

Is that a joke or what? I said that, scientifically speaking, no one knows for certain what happened at the “beginning” of the universe. Do you want to know why? Because no one was there to witness it.

 

I was... oh, wait, maybe that was the shrooms

 

It's not popular, it's the best theory to explain the evidence and that is the theory is best we have, which is why it is accepted by most scientists

nobody serious thinks the universe has always existed and there is a question on wherever the universe is infinite or not, because theories are actually being built

Except evolution was proven, hundreds of time and it was expanded
Who knows? Scientists and people who actually bother to inform themselves( you aren't part of this ensemble)
There is no excuse for being ignorant of the theory of evolution

Yes, they are all just theory
Which is why if you jump from 10 meters you shouldn't hurt yourself, after all, gravity is just a theory, nothing should happen, you have no weight after all and you do not get attracted by the mass of the Earth

No, don't do any of this, but learn what a scientific theory means, it doesn't mean theory in your sense, scientific theories are collection of facts and evidence and mathematical models designed to explain how the universe functions

Creationists aren't right, the world is older than 6000 years, animals didn't appear as they are now
Creationism doesn't explain the evidence, hence it is not a good theory, as in, it's wrong
Evolution so far is the best theory to explain the evidence
From a scientific standpoint we know the evidence and we have the best theory to explain it
So the evolutionists are right, which is why no serious scientific institution takes creationists seriously

You should not speak about science if you have no clue about what science is

Unfortunately it isn't a philosophical critique of science, of knowledge or reality, unlike that of Kant or the post modernists

Nobody knows for certain because reality isn't knowable for certain
However mankind can create models of reality that approach it, they are approximations of it and that's what science does

We more or less know what it happened at the beginning of the universe and we also know it had a beginning, the universe expanded from a point where it was condensed, it was a singularity

 

People who deny global warming (even seeing what happens with the glaciers) are similar to those who claim that the earth is flat: forms of dullness that could not be even justified nowadays (D. Trump docet).

The pollution of water and atmosphere caused by heavy metals, fine dust and billions of tons of carbon dioxide has led to the extinction of about half of the species living on the planet in just 40 years. In part also because of the increase in temperature, for us at the moment not very influential, but deadly for other species.

And what about the increasingly extreme atmospheric phenomena, which now occur in places where they were unknown up to 10-20 years ago? Fruit of the normal occurrence of geological ages, which require millions of years, or devastating changes caused by human activities?

It is even grotesque that we should talk about it, and very sad that there are those who are short-sighted enough not to notice it.

Thinking that everything we have around could ever be started from a single point of infinitesimal dimensions and of infinite mass is no longer credible than string theory supports.

Already in the current cosmological theory, called inflationary because it foresees an epoch of rapid expansion, the Big Bang does not correspond at the beginning of time, but at the end of the aforesaid epoch. The inflationary theory is agnostic on the question of the beginning of time. Instead, with string theory it is probable that we can continue to go back in time without any limitation.

As for the multiverse, it should be noted that it presupposes the existence of a single string theory, and therefore of a single system of equations. On the contrary, its solutions would be extremely numerous. This - always keeping in mind that we are only talking about theories - offers a much more satisfactory approach to get explanations at least more convincing than the Big Bang.

 

But has the string theory some sort of evidence to back it up?
When i say the big bang has evidence i was thinking about the cosmic background radiation and other stuff

String theory seems very theoretical so far, it's metaphysics, and i do not use this word as an insult, it's a mathematical model

 

It's just a matter of time.

The mathematics behind this theory is the most complex ever dared by man and the supporting models are still far from being well defined.

Nobody denies the existence of the cosmic background radiation, but even these concepts - which should provide proof of the Big Bang - must be updated to the current state of scientific observations.

As you may know, the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) is a satellite that measures just what remains of the radiation caused by the Big Bang (exactly, the cosmic background radiation). This satellite has discovered a cold region in the surrounding area in the constellation of the Iridan: one of the (few) possible explanations for this stain is that it is the imprint of another universe behind ours, caused by a quantum entanglement among the universes, before they were separated from inflation.

A research group led by Laura Mersini-Houghton, a professor of physics at the University of North Carolina, and certainly not a conspirator of the more established theories, is convinced about that, and at work to look for further evidence (another cold point, similar to the first, in the southern hemisphere of the celestial sphere) which would constitute the empirical proof of the existence of a parallel universe and with it would provide concrete support for string theory.

In my opinion we are not so far from receiving big surprises But, as always, you need to know how to look with the right eyes that you need to find out.

 

It's a reference and I get what you are saying, though I do have a question, why are we talking about science in a few month old thread about why DSO takes so much CPU and RAM (Just download RAM btw)

 

Idk. Maybe for fun. More fun talking about science here than wasting time on game these day. Plus, this is the spakers‘ corner so I think we could be not that strict here.

 

Alright, kinda seems weird to go from discussing a topic to a completely unrelated one and god forbid do we have enough salt about the game anyway.

 

Yes, it’s called the “theory” of evolution. If it was proven, why do we call it a “theory” at all? And why do you assume that we who question certain theories are creationists? I never said I was a creationist, nor did I say I was an evolutionist. Why do I have to be one of either? Why is everything only black or white with you? And what do you mean there is no excuse to disbelieve evolution? Who do you think you are? An all-knowing oracle or something? I believe that people should have the freedom to believe anything they want to believe. You believe that everyone should believe exactly what you believe because you are always 100% correct in any matter. Who’s really uninformed? Me or you?

Get your facts straight. There are many creationists who both study and lecture in many educational institutions. It’s just that you haven’t come across them that you are ignorant of this fact. Many creationists don’t even believe in God or a god; to be a creationist you have to believe that someone (doesn’t matter who) created the universe. It doesn’t have to be the Christian God. You’re just ignorantly playing with stereotypes which shows me that you don’t actually care about intellectual debate, you say this for the sake of argument.

Science does not prove any theory except that 2+2=4. That’s the nature of science. In order to prove something it has to 100% without any doubt whatsoever agree mathematically all of the time. That is why Newton’s theories of gravitation are just that - theories. Science can’t prove that everywhere in the universe those theories apply. Therefore we can’t definitively say that they are always true in every single case. If I am ignorant of science, then you are 100 times as ignorant of mathematics and the rules of basic numeracy. So please don’t spread your cultural Marxist crap about the theory of evolution being proved because this has never happened on planet Earth. Perhaps a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away evolution has been proven, but humanity as we know it has never proven evolution. Just like it is probably impossible to scientifically prove whether God or a deity of some sort exists, it is almost as difficult to prove evolution. The only way to do that is to either travel millions of years back in time or forward in time and analyse different specimens of lifeforms. But even then it would still not be a proven fact.

Many scientists nowadays believe that the big bang is a very flawed theory because, mathematically, an infinitely small singularity which is also infinitely dense simply cannot exist. And this is exactly what the big bang theory proposes. So whether or not the big bang theory is correct or not, there is no way in hell that you can claim it is 100% correct. If any of your claims are true, please show me some calculations to prove it. Otherwise the only conclusion I can make is that you are talking non-sensical socialist propaganda.

I can only refer you to what Traki said earlier in this very thread. It seems you didn’t read it closely, especially the bit regarding climate change and global warming.

@trakilaki, do we share the same brain or what? Absolutely everything you wrote I suspected was the truth before even reading it... Seriously, it’s scary that I have come across the exact same conclusions as you...

 

the final map of the cosmic background radiation created thanks to the observations of the Planck Surveyor space probe, July 2018.

 

Small modification to the thread title has been made, so you would all be on topic.

Cheers.