Lasers don't exert force, though. Just heat.
(Ok, technically that's not true. Light does exert force, but it produces so much more heat than force that even lasers many many orders of magnitude weaker would simply vaporize just about anything they hit.)
Well, there are lasers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HELIOS
The High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) or Mk 5 Mod 0 HELIOS[1] is a Lockheed Martin-developed 60 kilowatt high-energy laser weapon designed to intercept combat drones, fast-attack craft, and missiles.[2] After winning the contract in 2018, the first announced installation was on USS Preble (DDG-88) in 2019.[3] By 2021, it was reportedly deployed onto the Arleigh Burke-class ship as part of its anti-air Aegis Combat System.[2][4]
Since Covid there are a lot of Zoom meetings. He can always shop around and look for a place where he feels comfortable. It's not like he has to drive all over town.
Put it this way he went long enough where they started to having to mail out for chips to give him lol. I think he quit going after 15 years because it got into a brag fest and went to others with the same thing. Nothing but the young and old alike talking about incidences they were in and how, without saying it, were worse off than other but came back.
I had a former partner that was a heroin addict.
When getting surgery they specifically asked to not receive opiate medication due to their former addiction.
This is what people wear medical alert bracelets for.
However a doctor will violate your “wishes” to save your life.
None of the things you mentioned would be considered going overboard for any addict in remission in order to protect themselves and the folks around them and prevent a relapse. He is doing the right things.
If he's having issues or worried i would recommend he get a 'sponsor' in a program that he trusts to confide in. A sponsor is someone that has a lot of sobriety/clean time and experience.
I recommend any addict get a sponsor and follow some kind of program at least intrapersonally because there is no reason to do it the hard way with no guidance from experienced peers and professional drug counsellers. Going it alone increases relapse chance greatly.
I have heard that only 5% of the people in recovery stay clean. But it is not impossible.
[off topic?]
Does he go to NA/AA meetings?
I used to work in public health, and a lot of recovered addicts worry about these issues.
If he has a support group of people who understand his situation it might be easier.
I would’ve probably gone with “Imperial Japan.”
I think you either have go with separating those in power and the people (as you did with Nazis/Germans) or with the people at large (because to some degree the people are responsible for those that represent them.)
When the white people are given the benefit of the doubt but the non-whites aren’t, it exposes a bias, perhaps unconsciously.
I tend to think the separation of leaders and its people is the most fair, in part because I too am American and don’t want to answer for my current “leadership.”
That's a long time, most opioid addicts relapse within 1 year, according to this report.
The rate is actually so high(91%) I can't seem to find years after the first year.
major props to your brother.
Sorry I am an American and not really pc or up to date on it. What would the evil side during the period of Japan be called? Seriously asking
I agree it’s not fair to paint all Germans as Nazis. Why then is it okay to treat all Japanese as one?
Well I don't hold Nazi and German as both inclusive so I serperated them. We have gotten a lot from German's but was wondering if something came along from the bad side. It would be calling all German's Nazi's which are two seperate entities, at least in my opinion.
Matter would have to accrete equally at six equally spaced points, which as others have pointed out has a problem with getting started in the first place.
The other problem is that a protoplanetary disk is not uniform, so even if by some miracle, six things of equal mass started out at six equally spaced points along one orbit, one of them would almost certainly accrete more mass than the others.
That would throw the Lagrange points out of alignment, if not also slow the orbit of that body, and I imagine that would quickly lead to runaway loss of equilibrium.
You are free to imagine them going on to happy existences in separate orbits, perhaps with a sweet system of resonances around the star, but something tells me that's unlikely.
On the other hand, there's a neat fiction story in there somewhere if you want to apply it to our own inner planets. Mercury, Venus, proto-Earth, Theia, Mars and the asteroid belt happen to number exactly six.
The Lagrange points are only stable as long as the object in them is much, much smaller than the planet is. Once it becomes large enough to be exerting gravitational influence of its own the Lagrange points become unstable and it drifts out.
I don't think it's widely accepted as plausible any more, but I recall reading a theory that Theia (the planetoid that impacted Earth very early in the solar system's formation to cause the formation of the Moon) formed in one of the L4/L5 points in exactly the manner you're proposing but then collided with Earth once it got too big to remain stable there. IIRC more recent simulations suggest Theia had to hit at a higher velocity than this scenario was capable of producing, so that's why it's been deprecated, but the formation-then-instability bit is still valid.
Correct from what I can see. L4/5 are stable
again its an island of relative stability. they would have to get to the point at just the right direction and velocity to be stable and even then radiaiton from the sun or other effects can push it out. its stable for a man made sattelite because we make sure the momentum and dirction are just right and make minor adjustments over time to stay there. an object in motion stays in motion and an object at rest stays at rest unless acted on by an external force.
Manually positioned planets sharing an orbit is hella cool as a scifi concept, maybe as an early dyson sphere precursor.
My point is, material from the more distant regions of the protoplanetary disk that eventually coalesce into the planet have to move through the Lagrange points to get to the protoplanet. But once they’re near those points, the gravity of the protoplanet is unable to continue drawing them. So how does the protoplanet’s gravity attract material from farther away than its Lagrange points?
Oh, that's totally fair to call out, but to be honest, I didn't understand what you meant the first time.
I think what you are missing here is just how large a distance 1/6th of its orbit is. Also lagrange points dont pull anything. its a where gravity and orbital speed sync up. so shotting something at a lagrange won't cause it to orbit. you have to get the right orbit going with it at that point and then it will stay in that relative point somewhat. even at lagrange points some adjustments will have to be made. its an island of stability not an attractive force itself. any matter that hits that point and is not the exact right velocity won't stay there and even if it did it would lose it eventually do to outside forces unless it had some mechanism to stabilize.
Why is it Germans get spared in the question (it asked about Nazi contributions, not German) but they paint the Japanese with the same broad brush.
If the question was “what were the contributions made by the Axis countries” I wouldn’t have called it out. It’s a reasonable question.
Insert women, or African Americans, or any other minority in place of “the Japanese”, and you’ll see why it reads as bigoted.
to stay at a Lagrange point takes active adjusting. It’s not a low point in gravity, it’s more like balancing on the peak between the two bodies.
I thought that was true of L1, L2, and L3, but not L4 or L5—hence the stable clusters of trojans at Jupiter’s L4 and L5 points.
It's a valid question that created a lot of interesting answers. When you shut down questions like these, people go elsewhere to ask these questions and get racist answers.
The planets form when the material in an orbit condenses into one body. But as soon as a denser patch starts to condense, it will create stable regions at its L4 and L5 points. That is, the same gravitational force that pulls material together to form a planet should simultaneously be pulling material more than 1/6 of an orbit away to its Lagrange points instead of directly to itself.
Yeah. Lagrange points are a characteristic of two-body systems. While you'd get areas of increasing stability if a cloud condensed into two bodies, the rotational motion of the stuff in the cloud would outweigh that, and more stuff would be pulled in by the more massive bodies anyway.
If you got really lucky you might end up with a little bit of dust that happened to be going slow enough, but it's still not going to stay there. Solar wind is going to push stuff around, and to stay at a Lagrange point takes active adjusting. It's not a low point in gravity, it's more like balancing on the peak between the two bodies.