After a Russian attack, I highly doubt it.

The world would be too busy building nuclear bunkers.

To put some more context there, those US wars are always started by some Republican government when the oil price is falling. They almost always succeed in stopping the fall or making them rebound.

But correlation isn't causation. I don't think the US has fought any resources war since the 2 world wars. And they weren't in those for the resources either, even though both had an important resource sub-plot going on.

You can always move the payload away from the centrifuge, you don't have to spin any slower or faster.

The maximum apparent gravity is still fixed, but it's a direct consequence of the materials available so there's some industry standard chart somewhere where you can put those 1900 g-ton and read how many gs you can get.

Imagine if Putin managed to launch an attack and kill Trump.

There would be a few random weirdo on the streets celebrating his death. We are seeing the Venezuelan version of those weirdos.

Yes, it's content. But I can't complain, I've been warned.

Refineries that handle heavy crude can easily adapt to light crude, it's the other way around that doesn't happen.

The only reason they don't is because light oil is more expensive. There's no lack of oil for them.

Now we have an attack against an oil-producing country at a time the oil prices are the lowest they have been in many years. If this is about oil at all, it's to increase the price; but it's probably 100% about the Epstein files.

Well, there isn't any lack of oil to buy around right now, so I think the US is lying about their motives.

But hey, officially stating they invaded Venezuela because of oil is crazy. Whether it's true or not.

The year started in a hush...

Is 1 ton it’s weight limit? Dunno.

Its weight limit is 19 MN. You can divide it in any reasonable product of payload mass and apparent gravity you want.

It would be way more practical to label it by the actual weight than that gravity*mass bullshit. But engineering has some boneheaded practices that people insist on keeping alive, mostly for gatekeeping.

But Darwin, as far as I recall, didn’t use math at all.

You should take a look at modern evolution theories.

A whole host of sciences don’t approach their problems through mathematically described laws or even statistical models.

"Models" are something mathematical by definition. A lot of sciences have very simple models that people can handle without formalism. They are still mathematical, even if you don't need to calculate things.

Hum...

You may want that book. Be sure to get a single copy first.

Unfortunately, they both seem to be on the same day.