• m3t00🌎@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    spent years reading/drawing schematics. simplified bridge rectifier circuit used everywhere. like your phone charger. <sarcasm> magically keeps face glued to phone</sarcasm>

    • piranhaconda@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      I mean, yea. The people designing the AC to DC power supplies often don’t care what you use them for, why would they bother putting schematics for a real load on their diagram?

      • vithigar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 days ago

        It’s a basic AC rectifier, the resistor represents an arbitrary DC load. You use similar circuits all the time, though generally with additional failsafes and some mechanism of smoothing out the rectified current.

    • socsa@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      That’s not a resistor it’s actually a BIG LOAD. The diagram would better show it as a reactive load (usually just a rectangle) since most real loads are reactive. Get it?

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 days ago

      Clarke’s Maxim: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

      Corollary / Contrapositive: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.

  • MTK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Yeah but it’s too realistic, I want something convenient! Let me read one book and gain the power to create floating ice! Not read like 5 giant books and stufy for years so that I can create a microwave 😔

    No shade to microwaves, one of my favorite magic items

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      While it helps the ritual it isn’t strictly required, so it can be easier for an apprentice to achieve.

  • bss03@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 days ago

    When we figure out how to manipulate elctro-weak at scale, it will be magic.

    Electro-mag is pretty crazy already, I agree. The ICP can’t even figure out how they work.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 days ago

    While I fully agree, I thought the distinction was unbreakable rules.

    The laws of physics can’t be broken, even, under any circumstances, everywhere, at any time.

    Whereas magic is more like there is an exception to every rule kind of deal. It’s far more like software, as in it’s mostly fully logically consistent except for random spots where devs took some shortcuts to make life easier.

    • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 days ago

      I think the “exception to every rule” part is really dependent on which type of magic the writer is using. Many writers do establish hard rules for their magic. In those cases, it’s less “magic is the exception” and more “magic is engrained into the laws of physics.”

    • oo1@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      I don’t think magic is objective; I think it is in the eye of the beholder.

      If the audience don’t understand it, or can be distracted from seeing the truth of it, it’s magic or a miracle or whatever to them. And the magician - if they know what they’re doing - can wield power over the rubes.

      So before you understand - say, magnetism - better, lodestones can be seen as magical or heaven-sent.

      There’ll be physical phenomena today like ‘spooky action at a distance’ or something where even quite learned observers might not 100% know the laws of physics. Some exploit of that can appear as magical until the laws are figured out and well communicated.

      If it turns out that the underlying laws are stochastic rather than deterministic, then there’s always going to be some grey areas i think.