I mean, that’s a cool looking QR code that I’ve never seen before, which I suppose is technology related, but, other than that, I have no idea wtf this post is even supposed to be.

At least the two hemispheres are separated.

USD?

2 or 8

So, are you saying that your claim is conjecture? Or, perhaps, simply anecdotal?

libertarians aren’t a thing

[Libertarians] are republicans that are too embarrassed to identify as such publicly

Be careful to not make hasty generalizations.

To be fair, Libertardians also care about lowering the age of consent!

Based on what are you making this claim?

being libertarian is only marginally less embarrassing [than being a Republican] anyway

What about libertarianism is embarrassing to you?

Why does it seem that so many of those who claim that they’re libertarians are not actually libertarians?

ELI5 How come it seems now the old [wives’] tale of Vietnamese eating pets and now its immigrants into the USA?

That’s still a rather incomprehensible sentence.

ELI5 How come it seems now the old wise tale of Vietnamese eating pets and now its immigrants into the USA?

I don’t understand that sentence.

Metaverse in my ass.

LibreOffice Draw?

The secret to success: survivorship bias.

What exactly am I looking at? Is this just for visual aesthetic on the outside of a building, or is there some specific purpose served by this architecture?

They don’t quite look like balconies, and there’s a hole. Perhaps in the rightmost column I can see a part of a railing or a window through some of the holes?

EDIT: Just saw this post in my feed, which I think is showing the same architecture as this one. It appears to be for aesthetic purposes, but I could certainly be wrong.

Facebook marketplace is the only reason I still have a Facebook account.

!trippinthroughtime@lemmy.ca

The Higgs mechanism has been theorized to give mass to elementary particles [1]. That is not to say that the total of inertial mass of a non-elementary massive object is due to the Higgs Boson.

To make it as simple as possible

Too simple, imo. It simplifies to the point of becoming incorrect.

Higgs makes it hard to push something.

One is called inertial mass (what we feel due to the Higgs mechanism)

The Higgs mechanism has been found to give mass to elementary particles only (short of neutrinos) [3]. This is important to note, as the mass of hadrons is far larger than the sum of their constituent elementary particles [4]. The rest, and vast majority, is found in the bound energy (eg the Strong Interaction) of the elementary particles (eg quarks) [1][2].

Regarding “Inertial mass”, I want to note the following definition for clarity:

Inertial mass is a measure of an object’s resistance to acceleration when a force is applied. [5]

Higgs makes it hard to push something. Gravity makes it hard to lift something.

The Higgs interaction contributes to both. Mass due to the Higgs interaction is a component of inertial mass, given that the Higgs boson gives mass the elementary particles contained within [3]. Inertial mass is a measure of an objects inertia (ie its resistance to acceleration when a force is applied) [1][2].

Note that the concept of “lifting” only applies in a gravitational field when a force is able to be created by pushing off of a surface — the resistance to the “lift” being created by the objects weight. If one is in free-fall, for example, the effects of gravity are no longer apparent given that one has no reference to the fact that they are falling.

the other is called gravitational mass (what we feel due to gravitational attraction between two masses).

I’m not sure exactly what you are trying to say here, but I suspect you are perhaps referring to the following excerpt(s) from Wikipedia:

Active gravitational mass is a measure of the strength of an object’s gravitational flux [1]

Passive gravitational mass is a measure of the strength of an object’s interaction with a gravitational field. [1]

I’ve personally never heard the term “gravitational mass” before, but it could be found from the above two statements, or more succinctly stated:

Gravitational mass is the “m” in F = GmM/r2 (Newton’s law of universal gravitation) [2]

They are usually the same so the distinction is usually ignored.

This statement is rather dubious. Simply put, there has simply not been found any empirical difference between inertial mass and gravitational mass. [1]

I don’t actually know what the higgs field is.

I wouldn’t be comfortable getting into the details of the actual “Higgs field” is, nor the Higgs boson, as I am not confident in my understanding, but, for the sake of the meme, the following excerpt from Wikipedia should suffice:

via the Higgs mechanism, [the Higgs boson] gives a rest mass to all massive elementary particles of the Standard Model, including the Higgs boson itself. [source]

I assumed it was gravity.

Gravity can be understood as the attractive force that two massive objects impart on eachother [1.1] ­— the strength of the gravitational force imparted by one object onto another is proportional to the mass of the former object [1.2]. Do note that this is a simplification. Gravity, as far as it is currently understood, is quite a bit more complicated than this (I am primarily referring to General Relativity) [1].