It makes sense why there are no sticks. But I agree, the thought of a lack of sticks seems to be unsettling, not a lack of trees or bushes.
Are we that naturally attracted to sticks because of primate evolution? I wonder if the earliest human ancestors developed this awareness of sticks as it is a primitive tool used to survive.
Ooooh that paper bag idea is nifty.
We actually discovered something that worked far better than peanut butter - Reese's peanut butter cups. You break off a little piece, squish it into a ball, and place it on the bait lever. Not a single trap misfired once we switched to that.
If you have used Matlab, Or R, there is a huge range of data science that only really requires an undergrad in math. Hospitals that run their own Clinical Trials usually have a consistent need.
Really you're eligible for anything statistics related, and there is a lot out there. Some job titles to look for:
They will have a joyous time with it. And you might find eviscerated mice under your couch one day. But my two dumbass fur balls just thought they were awesome toys.
Never figured out quite when they stopped coming in. The only really humane way to kill em is snap traps. I probably went through a couple dozen of them before they stopped showing up.
I was against using poisoned food traps because the last thing I wanted was my cat consuming a poisoned mouse. But, since our whole neighborhood had a problem with the mice, I wouldn't be too surprised if a neighbor did it.
Well, they sort of have to be. They're the janitors. Think Mr. Wolf from Pulp Fiction. They fix problems. Intelligence leaks, missing weapons of mass destruction, and almost certainly disposing of burnt assets.
Bond's psychological profile deems him unfit for intelligence service - but that's not his job. His job is to clean up whatever the intelligence service fucks up. In the beginning of Casino Royale it also states that you have to kill two targets - and as he says after shooting the guy "Yes. That was much easier." (Or something like that). So he's clearly fucked up at that point.
That's kind of a common question amongst the short stories too.
The part that bothers me is that 007 is assigned to Nomi in No Time To Die. So it sort of makes me wonder why they would assign a different name to the same cover?
We do know that M was the same character in Goldeneye, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is Not Enough, Die Another Day, Casino Royale, Quantum Solace, and Skyfall. So James Bond 007 is clearly a code name for that MI6 cleaner.
Idk. I think they just don't explain it because they enjoy that little bit of stuff being confusing as covert stuff should be.
With a cabinet made of billionaires?
Yeah ok what else you want us to smoke
I say it every time this comes up, and it sparks anger, but the movie that did it was Civil War.
Iron Man flinches from a punch Cap throws. A human with peak capable strength does that to the same goddamn dude who took a fucking tank round and just had scorch marks on his armor.
Then in infinity war, the Two stone wielding Thanos frightens Hulk? Bullshit, get out of here. Hulk would have flattened him.
Plus you cannot tell me that Bond didn't survive in that last movie.
It even says "James Bond Will Return" at the end. So like duh, he didn't die
(I know but I really want to believe we're not done with Daniel Craig as Bond)
The math is describing reality - but that's why I highlighted that the math predicted it long before there was experimental evidence.
From what we know about the quantum realm (my physics professor liked using that description, as if it's a whole different existence), it appears that it's actually the opposite: reality is obeying the math. Consider how wild that is - particle interactions are doing what they do because of how mathematics works. Something that we humans came up with to describe observations.
So the way I "understood" the spin-statistics theorem is that it's basically this:
A given particle with a given intrinsic spin has a direct relationship to a collection of the same particles as a consequence of quantum math. Yeah. Just "it's related."
Proving that math is really freaking difficult and you need to use relativistic quantum field theory. I think it was Richard Feynman who said "We apologize for the fact that we cannot give you an elementary explanation."
Actually when I graduated there was another professor (can't remember his name) who was discussing his frustration with how they still can't explain it without all of QFT steps.
Basically, this is where the shared attitude of "the more you know about quantum physics, the more confusing it becomes."
That doesn't make sense, if that were the case it wouldn't be relevant anymore as humans simply walking on the continent would introduce incredible amounts of bacterias and viruses.
Even with the sterile processing of Moon and Mars rovers have observed this. It's impossible to prevent, only reduce.