Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?

Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> wrote:

On 2024-09-28 5:47, Brett wrote:

Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> wrote:

On 2024-09-27 21:43, Brett wrote:

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:55:50 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
 

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:21:53 -0000 (UTC), Brett wrote:
 

You hear physicists talk of microscopic black holes, but the force
that keeps atoms apart is so much more powerful than gravity that
such talk is just fools playing with math they don’t understand.

 
That would mean that neutron stars (all the atoms crushed so tightly
together that individual subatomic particles lose their identity)
couldn’t exist either. But they do.

 
Radio pulsars exist.
The theory is that they are neutron stars. But theory can be wrong.

 
Some of the pulsars are spinning at such a rate that they would fly apart,
so we know the theory is wrong.

 
 
Which pulsars are spinning too fast? Reference please!

 
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSR_J1748%E2%88%922446ad#:~:text=PSR%20J1748%E2%88%922446ad%20is%20the,was%20discovered%20by%20Jason%20W.%20T.
 
 
Spinning at 42,960 revolutions per minute.

 
 
The article says it is "the fastest-spinning pulsar known", but does not
say that it is spinning faster than neutron-star theories allow, so it
does not support your claim.
 

Took seconds for google to answer.

 
It is the wrong answer, at least for your claim.

Our sun spinning at 42,960 revolutions per minute would exceed the speed of
light at its surface, much less be able to hold together.

The theory is wrong.

A better theory is leakage from a Dyson generator swarm, but no scientist
could ever say such a thing in public.