Laguna Seca, a fairly famous California race track, was opened in 1957 built out in the middle of nowhere. In 2024, people that moved near the racetrack sued to get it shut down.

I know there's some level of caveat emptor when buying a house, and realtors are guaranteed to not have any showings when it's noisy, but maybe just spell it out and the purchaser needs to be made aware.

> Laguna Seca, a fairly famous California race track, was opened in 1957 built out in the middle of nowhere. In 2024, people that moved near the racetrack sued to get it shut down.

“I swear, the race track just materialized out of nowhere!” -A wealthy liar living in California

I assume it was dismissed immediately since Laguna Seca is almost 70 years old.

It was not

I'd be more worried about all the leaded gas that GA planes use.

Oh no, there are all these old engine that can't use unleaded gas. The hobby pilots just have no choice but to continually dust the surrounding area with lead vapors. They certainly can't be forced to update their engines/aircraft. Cry me a river.

The reason they use old engines and leaded fuel is mostly due to FAA rules, not personal preference. Pilots spend a lot of time around airfields & avgas, so they want to get rid of lead additives as well.

Oil, natural gas, corn (for fuel), soybeans (for cattle feed)

The length of a noon-to-noon day (synodic day) varies from +29.9 seconds near the winter solstice to −21.3 seconds near the autumnal equinox[1]. If you account for the seasonal changes, you get closer to the ideal solar day which only deviates by milliseconds from 86400 s, but that deviation does pile up and "forces" leap seconds. I say "forces" because it's a legal requirement that the time tracks the sun.

Going to leap hours I think is a sufficient kick of the can down the road, one is only needed every few centuries. Pretty sure something'll happen in the next 600 years that obviates the need for that though (nuclear war, asteroid, technological singularity, need for a unified solar system time...), so us hack programmers can assume all three of those things.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synodic_day

Legal only in the sense that the requirement hasn't changed since the Romans invented the concept of time.

If you really want to think about it, were it not for them, we wouldn't have many of the things we have today.

Philip K. Dick was correct, the Roman Empire never truely fell.

> Going to leap hours I think is a sufficient kick of the can down the road, one is only needed every few centuries.

The drama of rolling out the Gregorian calendar to replace the Julian so that the seasons went back to where they 'should' be shows how convoluted things could get in coördinating things.

From the bubble center plot, I'm guessing that the bubbles are separated on average about a few mm apart? Taking the other comment's guess at face value, you're going from about 2 mm to 20 um, so 2 orders of magnitude. Air (technically SF6 in the article) and water (RBC is close enough) have acoustic impedances that differ by 3.5 orders of magnitude.

My assumptions here are *extremely generous*, i.e. favorable to the "oh, we'll just make it work with natural contrast", and even then, they can't hand wave 5-6 orders of magnitude of improvement. Furthermore, because of the use of super resolution, I'm guessing there's some exponential factor in there, i.e. double the density of bubbles/tracking points past some critical limit, then you need 8x the data to reconstruct things.

As another way to estimate this, here’s a data sheet for some microbubbles:

https://pdf.benchchem.com/1673/Application_Notes_and_Protoco...

So 1-5e8 bubbles per mL, and let’s suppose you inject 5mL. (I have no idea what the human dose is, but that’s what’s in this particular kit.)

You apparently have 5e9 or so RBCs per mL of blood:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_blood_count

You have about 5L of blood, so that’s three orders of magnitude more volume than the contrast, and RBCs are 10x-50x as concentrated as the microbubbles in the syringe, so about 4 orders of magnitude concentration difference.

It’s basically changing this from a 0D problem to a 1D problem.

> From the bubble center plot, I'm guessing that the bubbles are separated on average about a few mm apart?

The page is vague so I can't tell. I think the images they're showing are actually a composite of many bubbles tracked through the vasculature.

They say this:

> As bubbles flow through the vasculature, we accumulate millions of these positions and stack them into a single image with detail finer than the wavelength.

And the rendering showing the bubble centers they're tracking only shows a few small points moving at a time.

I think that the amazing animation they produced at the top is actually a composite of many different trackings, not an actual representation of what they capture in real-time.

This is old (2025).

Fortune links to a BBC article, which doesn't really provide any more detail about the testing conditions. I wonder if rubbing a bar of soap on your windows would reflect light and be easier to wash off. Also, were the windows tested low-E or not?

I still don't understand why programmers seemed to get off on this sort of shit. Doing `while((dest++ = src++));` is great and all (maybe fine because it's kinda idiomatic now, but should you really be using that over `strncpy`?), but being clever like that in real code makes it harder to review, and harder to understand months down the line. I've mentally cussed out 'whoever wrote this confusing shit' to only `git blame` myself.

> Cocaine and its metabolite can help fish swim farther, but it could put them in danger, report finds

Isn't this true for people as well?

Why would this be any different from dropping a coin or other small metal object? If you're worried about ultrasonic noise pollution, nearly every SMPS operates there, and they're constantly running.

Don't know adding, but multiplication has diagram on the last page of the PDF.

xy = eml(eml(1, eml(eml(eml(eml(1, eml(eml(1, eml(1, x)), 1)), eml(1, eml(eml(1, eml(y, 1)), 1))), 1), 1)), 1)

From Table 4, I think addition is slightly more complicated?

Thanks for posting that. You had a transcribing typo which was corrected in the ECMAScript below. Here's the calculation for 5 x 7:

    const eml = (x,y) => Math.exp(x) - Math.log(y);
    const mul = (x,y) => eml(eml(1,eml(eml(eml(1,eml(eml(1,eml(1,x)),1)),eml(1,eml(eml(1,eml(y,1)),1))),1)),1);
    console.log(mul(5,7));

> 35.00000000000001

For larger or negative inputs you get a NaN because ECMAScript has limited precision and doesn't handle imaginary numbers.

> For larger or negative inputs you get a NaN because ECMAScript has limited precision and doesn't handle imaginary numbers.

This also shows why EML is not practical for computation.

x+y = ln(exp(x) * exp(y))

exp(a) = eml(a, 1) ln(a)=eml(1,eml(eml(1,a),1))

Plugging those in is an excercise to the reader

You use multiplication in the first line, which you have not expressed through eml yet.

Because of how exp and log turn addition into multiplication and vice versa, once you have the one, you get the other easily.

might need to turn the paper sideways