Works perfectly in 1Password. One-click sign-in is awesome! I don't understand the hate towards passkeys. Managing passwords for non-techies is infinitely worse in my experience.
I’m not disputing that passwords suck. It’s just that the experience with passkeys hasn’t matched the vision I’ve been sold when I first read about it.
I am sure a more mainstream solution such as Google/Apple/Microsoft/1Password’s password manager would be a better experience. But the portability and data sovereignty of using a self hosted open source password manager such as Keepass is a requirement I have and like I mentioned, the supermajority of my online accounts have zero passkey support even 2 years in.
This has the same number of free parameters as LambdaCDM. Also this result only looks supernovae, i.e. low redshift sources. LambdaCDM is tested on cosmological scales.
thats not the case, if, as is increasingly speculated, the lambda is not constant over time. you figure two parameters for linear and three for a quadratic experience
Well no, that's not the reason why we're not Boltzmann Brains. A Boltzmann Brain is perfectly capable of believing that it is sensing reality in exactly the same way that your brain believes so.
It is worth reading the section "Modern reactions to the Boltzmann brain problem" in the article to understand why the Boltzmann Brain is a useful thought experiment.
If you like audio books I can highly recommend the book Endurance by Alfred Lansing, read by Simon Prebble. Perhaps the best audio book I’ve ever listened to.
Sean Carroll (professor of physics, quoted in the article) has a highly-rated book titled "Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and the Emergence of Spacetime" [1] which discusses exactly these topics. I haven't read it, but it's on my list.
I also highly recommend his podcast "Mindscape" where he discusses this and a range of other topics in science and philosophy. [2]
There are no such things as absolute static things in relativity theory. "Before" and "After" depend entirely on the observer. Energy/matter and spacetime are deeply connected through the Einstein equations, so much so that they may indeed be "the same underlying thing".
Approximate static time and space are convenient illusions/approximations, that happen to be very useful for us as a species when it comes to surviving and replicating, but the Universe has no obligation to cater to our feeble minds or senses when it comes to reality.
> "Before" and "After" depend entirely on the observer.
This is only true for space-like separated events. But the earth gets wet After the rain started, for any observer in any frame of reference whatsoever. The eggs have to break Before you can make the omelette.
Lorentzian manifolds come with a definition of causality. The spacetime of Special Relativity is a Lorentzian manifold. An additional condition of time-orientability obliterates the free choice of an observer on a "comes-before"/"comes-after" relation between observable events.
A further condition of global hyperbolicity also determines the "comes-before"/"comes-after" relation between unobservable events. This condition can be fixed by (i) a non-Minkowski metric, or (ii) by constraints on the pattern of events in the gravitation-free metric of Special Relativity (an example of such constraints is thermodynamics). Sloganizing this: "states of matter tells you what configuration came before/came after" in the second case, and also in the first case if the non-Minkowski metric's source is only matter; otherwise you need to do a causality analysis, e.g. by fixing causal cones on curves (paths, trajectories - they don't have to be geodesics) of interest or solving the relevant wave equations).
As a practical matter, the initial value formulation of General Relativity <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_value_formulation_(gen...> (and numerical relativity built on that) is popular and of practical use because so far there is no reason to describe a natural system (where gravity isn't just ignored) in a way that breaks global hyperbolicity.
>There are no such things as absolute static things in relativity theory.
Well there is light-speed, which is an "absolute universal constant" - though of course light-speed is directly related to time. Also general relativity as a bit more to say on the topic.
>Approximate static time and space are convenient illusions/approximations, that happen to be very useful for us as a species when it comes to surviving and replicating, but the Universe has no obligation to cater to our feeble minds or senses when it comes to reality.
Sure. Even theories that don’t rely on time to be a fundamental dimension fall in the same category of "universe doesn’t need our small minds to be able to grab its actual complexity".
Sounds like it's more of a campaign than an actual ban.
> It is not enforceable by police – officers could not stop or fine people scrolling in the street because there is no national law against smartphones – but the mayor describes it as an incitement to stop scrolling and guidance for limiting phone use.
It sounds silly on its face but these things can have impacts. Say that a store bans the use of phones. Is this ordinance a defense against a discrimination suite brought by someone kicked out while using a translation or vision app? The store would say that it was simply acting in support of a local ordinance.
