Ok, so, this is in the context of closed timelike curves. This is a thing which appears in the math of general relativity. It has never been observed in real life, and may disappear if we ever have a reconciliatian of quantum mechanics and gravity.
The study was a computer simulation of "what if we had some particles in a closed timelike curve and could mess with them", and there is no suggestion of this being applicable or even possible in the real world.
As far as I knew, everybody hated him. He was already a self aggrandizing corrupt piece of shit. He was basically the Democrat even saten island could vote for.
Correction: they were all incompetant traitors
Mountain bases can support a lot. Everest is not terribly tall from its base, true, but Denali is 5500 meters from base to top and Mauna Kea rises to 10000 meters over base.
Its also a bit of an incorrect picure to think of the interior magma as a liquid. It can flow, but it can also sieze up or crack. Its an in-between, like corn starch and water.
What we see now are the ancient roots. Before the continental colision, there was a sea and subduction zone. This gave us sandstones, diorite, and granite... All of which were crushed at incredible pressure and temperature by the continental collision. At the deep roots of the mountains, this transformed the rock into gneiss, marble, and other extremely hard rock. Additionally, the forces were so great that the very bottom melted and became fresh granite.
All of these stones are very hard and resistant to erosion, and are what we see todayas the Appalachians
Its indirectly gravity. The taller the mountain, the more eroding force can be pleced on it. Water travels faster and therefore cuts deeper.
Everest is still uplifting fairly quickly at 1mm a year, but its also eroding at roughly the same pace and won't get significantly taller than it is now. The same is true for the rest of the Himalaya as well, the whole range is eroding at a very high pace.
The Himalaya are home to some very spectacular canyons, including the largest canyon above water. The geology there is on full display and incredible.
I have started daydreaming of a career change to geology. There are just so many unanswered questions and its not like space or physics were these questions are tinyor super far away. You can just walk upto a geologic puzzle and hit it with a hammer.
Ok yeah this was good
One nit, pangea wasn't the first supercontinent, we know of at least two, maybe three before it. The stone of the Adirondak mountains was formed as part of the Grenville mountains, which were built by a suprecontinent 1.5 billion years ago (the adirondaks got tall be'ause of a much more recent, unrelated thing, but their stone is very old). The Grenville runs from Hudson Bay to Texas
Completely unrelated. North and south america wern't attached when the appalachians were tall. The Andes are formed by an ocean plate (the Nazca plate) dragging as it is sucked under south america. They are tall, and still growing taller.
This is because thats basically the upper limit for how tall a mountain can be on this planet.
This is interesting, but the take also seems to miss in several points, for me. The main thing that has happened since the author entered the idustry is the shiftover from web pages to web applications. This has had knock on effects across the industry.
Whats the difference, you ask? A web page is a mostly static and mostly stateless program. It is made of html, enhanced through javascript. A web app is a regular application, delivered to the platform of the web. It is written in javastcript and produces html. It is often very stateful. It is very dynamic.
Jquery, probably the most powerful tool for enhancing websites, was released in 2006. This was the height of website design, as the webdesigner could create the structure in html and then modify it with jquery. It was a blend of design and technical application. Its no surprise that the big social media all dates from around this time. Social media is a mostly static experience that jquery made very delightful.
React was released in 2013. This was the first major framework to be javascript-first. The layout and structure of the page took place entirely in javascript. It was no longer a blend of skills, creating the page was a fully programing job. This brought web more into the traditional software industry, with all that that entails. It also enabled web design applications, such as Squarespace, which further deminished web design as a practice.
I started in the industry in 2008. In my experiance, there was never a strong representation of women in web design. This got worse asthings shifted, but its a mischaracterization, I think, to say that women were pushed out. Its also a mischaracerization to talk about the creation ofthe front end developer role or the ux role. These roles have always existed (or, at least, existed since before the time period we are talking about). These are application development roles. Windows and Mac apps had ux designers and front end developers already. When those same companies decided to usethe browser as their platform rather than the desktop, it was natural to transfer those same roles.
If anything, it seems, the period of web design was the oddity as industry norms just weren't available in the less powerful browsers of the time.