Search options (Page 3 of 151)

Picking them off like wine goblets at the cardinals' feasts?

Shooting meatballs off a pizza?  Shooting tiramasu at a Roman feast?  Plinking wine goblets at a Roman feast?

I rather like inxplode.  But some self-important editor or, worse, some smaraifishul intelyjint ottokurruptor will change it everywhere to either 'explode' or 'exim bank'.

Heinlein and "shipstone"s

Quanrum Tunneling with some handwavium to let 90% or more of the energy through.

Saw this recently: https://www.sciencealert.com/tapping-in … nsane-bomb

I don't think that a breakthrough in fundamental physics would interest our journalists half as much as a political scandal or a seahorse romance.  Besides, most of then couldn't pass high school physics, much less get Einstein's 1930s work right.  Heck, they couldn't even get it wrong!  (High school physics: show that the units are consistent in e = mc² .)

I read a mostly excellent popular history of precision.  But in discussing electronics, the author applied something about field effect transistors to bipolar junction transistors, or vice versa.  It shook my confidence in the whole book.  Yes, the topic sounds esoteric, but if you know electronics it's like confusing a steam engine with a diesel engine, or an oil filter with an air filter.

But the combined ((tech)) fields might overload local space, or the emitters might interfere with each other in a multidimensional phase relationship.

Did you know that a spectrum is a space of infinite dimension, of the sort called a Hilbert space?   Just throw in Hilbert Phase Space and you can tech-abracadabra almost anything.  Multiple powertrons driving a single load must be aligned in their Hilbert phase space.  Perfect alignment is impossible, and the effect of misalignment grows faster than exponentially with increasing power ... .   (Remember that the factorial grows faster than any exponential in the limit toward infinity.  That's why power series converge.  And the continuous equivalent to the factorial is the gamma function, offset by one in its argument.)

You could make this action risky by adding known and unknown likely consequences: energy spilling back and damaging the source vessel or others near it, energy reflecting back into the weapons and the power source behind them, perhaps with energy stored and falling back like a heavy weight that slips loose, or energy venting in unknown ways through the extra dimensions, as a consequence of loss of accuracy at higher power, or of overloading space itself, or of some ensign who won't stop chewing gum.

Look at the few differences and decide for yourself which is the more vigorous prose.  Grammarly dropped a comma; tell me which reads better.

My guess is that my vivid, energetic prose defeated or flustered most of its algorithms.  It fell back on a stylebook comma rule and the reduction of more colorful prepositional phrases to adverb and adjective modifiers.  Its first change also turned a precise description (with an elided 'that is') into flavorless, stale mush of the sort favored by academics when pushing agendas

'budgeted as an adjective' reads like someone trying to hide a staff party in the quarterly budget.  Has  Grammarly has been helping with too much academic administrivia?

The Great Crash destroyed the only complete copies of my Comma Heresy Manifesto.  I should reconstitute it.

Perhaps Grammarly's last name is Mediocre?

Welcome!

To follow up on George FLC's comment on grammar, and since I'm mostly lurking these days, here's my minimized lecture on grammar:

Grammar is not just a thing right or wrong.  Grammar is a tool of the writer.  In English's magnificently rich grammar there are usually many ways to present a structure of ideas.  In a complex sentence, we choose which idea deserves the high seat of the main clause, and which ideas should support from subordinate clauses.  We decide which modifiers deserve the weight of a relative clause, which justify a prepositional phrase, and which can be budgeted an adjective or adverb, according to how much of the reader's attention we want to spend on each.  We order our clauses and sentences with care so that the prose flows smoothly through one topic and into the next, with a minimum of jumping back and forth.