Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: rocurley 15 May 2013 06:18:14AM 5 points [-]

Yes, but if I'm reading this right, the payoff matrix is different from the PD. If two large vehicles collide, it's about as bad as two small vehicles colliding. This means that if everyone drove a huge truck, safety would be improved overall (trees won't get bigger to match, and no one cares about their safety). If all you care about is safety, the optimal situation is everyone in a large vehicle.

Meetup : Washington DC Munchinkry meetup

0 rocurley 12 May 2013 12:17AM

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington DC Munchinkry meetup

WHEN: 12 May 2013 03:00:00PM (-0400)

WHERE: National Portrait Gallery, Washington, DC 20001, USA (courtyard)

Meet to talk about interesting lifehacky things!

(Credit to Maia for the idea for this one).

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington DC Munchinkry meetup

Comment author: rocurley 11 May 2013 01:53:21AM 0 points [-]

No, I didn't. It's fixed now, thanks.

Comment author: rocurley 10 May 2013 12:35:37AM *  0 points [-]

I agree that it's at least quite plausible (as per your post, it's not proven to follow from GR) that if the universe spun around you, it might be exactly the same as if you were spinning. However, if there's no background at all, then I'm pretty sure the predictions of GR are unambiguous. If there's no preferred rotation, then what do you predict to happen when you spin newton's bucket at different rates relative to each other?

EDIT: Also, although now I'm getting a bit out of my league, I believe that even in the massive external rotating shell case, the effect is miniscule.

EDIT 2: See this comment.

Comment author: rocurley 09 May 2013 03:30:28PM *  1 point [-]

I think the center of mass thing is a bit of a red herring here. While velocity and position are all relative, rotation is absolute. You can determine if you're spinning without reference to the outside world. For example, imagine a space station you spin for "gravity". You can tell how fast it's spinning without looking outside by measuring how much gravity there is.

You can work in earth-stationary coordinates, there will just be some annoying odd terms in your math as a result (it's a non-inertial reference frame).

Meetup : Washington DC fun and games meetup

0 rocurley 02 May 2013 05:34PM

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington DC fun and games meetup

WHEN: 05 May 2013 03:00:00PM (-0400)

WHERE: National Portrait Gallery, Washington, DC 20001, USA (courtyard)

We'll be meeting to hang out and play games.

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington DC fun and games meetup

Meetup : Washington DC books meetup

0 rocurley 26 April 2013 06:06PM

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington DC books meetup

WHEN: 28 April 2013 03:00:00PM (-0400)

WHERE: National Portrait Gallery, Washington, DC 20001, USA (courtyard)

We'll be meeting to talk about books we've found interesting, exchange books (so bring some!) and decide if/how we want to have a book club.

(This was also the last meetup topic, which got cancelled at the last minute)

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington DC books meetup

Comment author: rocurley 22 April 2013 05:37:43AM 4 points [-]

I realize this imposes some costs on you, but I'd recommend that you just say you're going to be at a place and time with a sign, and that people should come. This avoids the whole "I'm not sure I should come because everyone else might not come because they're not sure..." cycle.

You might want to choose the date/time based on feedback here, but honestly I've had a lot of trouble scheduling meetups based on feedback about time, and I eventually just started dictating meetup times.

Comment author: rocurley 20 April 2013 05:15:08PM 0 points [-]

DC group: %25 of regular attendees.

Comment author: rocurley 17 April 2013 04:44:26PM 0 points [-]

Washington DC RSVP thread:

View more: Next