24 points
*

You might find this interesting: Non-Euclidean Doom: what happens to a game when pi is not 3.14159…

The magic starts at 6:47

permalink
report
reply
4 points

It starts to get really funky.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

The video and the effects of different pi values are sick! But I’ve never heard such a bad speaker. Speaking in front of an audience isn’t the strong suit of this guy

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

This comment is kinda mean. He successfully engaged the audience and even makes them laugh while informing them on his topic. I’m curious to hear what qualifies him as a “bad speaker” in your mind.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

This doesn’t directly answer your question, but things would probably get very weird compared to our universe. Here’s an interactive visualization of a different weird universe with two time dimensions, Dichronauts by Greg Egan:

https://www.gregegan.net/DICHRONAUTS/02/Interactive.html

He really goes through the math on that site, so you might get some insight into how other topologies would look

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Whoa. That’s over my head.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Probably a lot like Indiana.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

OOF!

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I prefer π = 3.14 ± 0.14. Add a little chaos.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

I suppose you could redefine pi to be exactly like 3, but you’d have to change the value of 1 to be equal to (π/3) which would make it very difficult to buy bananas.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

I don’t buy bananas, so this isn’t relevant to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Casual Conversation

!casualconversation@lemm.ee

Create post

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you’ll make some friends in the process.


RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won’t be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There’s a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it’s vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a “controversial” message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a “spammy” message must be applicable to four purple answers before it’s allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it “would be a copyright violation if the info was art” as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar’s Number) or less, it’s considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

Community stats

  • 3.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 681

    Posts

  • 15K

    Comments