No, even without an atmosphere you have to contend with the diffraction-limited resolving power through an aperture (pupil), which is related to the diameter of the aperture and the wavelength of light.

A diffraction process is, mathematically, a fourier transform. A fundamental mathematical feature of a fourier transform is what’s known as the uncertainty principle.

Side note: you’ve probably heard of the special case of an uncertainty principle encountered in quantum mechanics frequently misattributed to the head of the Nazi nuclear program (Heisenberg), but this mathematical principle was actually well known for centuries beforehand, and the misattribution is mostly because of Nazi propaganda. We see it anywhere a fourier transform is used, from optics to orbital dynamics to quantum particles. This mathematical phenomenon is frequently miscited as quantum “weirdness” even though there’s nothing quantum (or all that weird) about it.

The pupil restricts the possible positions of incoming photons. A restriction in position increases the variance of momenta (for a photon, speed never changes, but the momentum vector can still change direction). A smaller pupil is more restrictive and causes the image to be blurrier as the incoming photons from each object you are trying to resolve. If you want to be able to resolve smaller angular sizes (small objects at large distances), you need a large aperture that reduces position restrictions on incoming photons and therefore diffraction-induced blurring due to momentum uncertainties.

Look up Airy diffraction for the special case of a circular aperture (e.g. a pupil or telescope).

How has he destroyed his reputation? Just curious.

It’s not just that, it’s a chance at a fresh start to excite people about a new direction for this country.

syzygy

Bonus points for no aeiou.

For best flavor, gently tenderize your long pork against a table to get the juices flowing before cutting off another ham steak.

http://sds.staples.com/msds/24420590.pdf

Thanks for the leads and the good conversation. I have found that being an idiot in public and then deescalating is one of the fastest ways to gather information.

Thanks for pointing out that in this case the DM is using X regardless of whatever graphical environment gets loaded when the user logs in. This really is a moot point/discussion. I’m still glad I raised it to get perspectives like yours.

You’re right that I should play around with wlroots a bit more. It’s been a while, personally. Mostly because it’s been a while since I’ve had time to just play around with my system. My life is at a point that it looks like I’ll have that free time soon, for better or for worse.

I’ll note that I do like alternative init systems for diversity and competition and because systemd was very hungry and rigid. An init system is also a bit more fundamental to system stability than a display server, so I think it’s reasonable to be critical of systemd and Wayland for contradictory reasons. Systemd has also come a very long way in the past decade plus. I have also seen it learn from the other ideas implemented in its competition, mirroring your argument. Diversity and unification are not at odds with each other, but are different parts of the same cycle of improvement.

Good to know that this has been implemented in your favorite DE! Considering how Wayland often implements things, it’s probably implemented on the DE-level, leading to a fractured configuration ecosystem. Being implemented in Wayland is different from being implemented in some of the DEs that use Wayland.

edit: if I’m wrong about that, and it is implemented in Wayland itself, please continue to correct me!

It’s not just about it being a config file, it’s also about having access to a powerful tool like xrandr within that config file.

That’s kind of my point. Something like randr is more fundamental than the DE, and its configuration shouldn’t be fractured by being DE-dependent. I personally don’t like DEs at all, and like the ability to control a more minimal system.

I’ve never needed any of those things.

I do need to change monitor configurations.

I once had an old TV that I used as a monitor that had 1027p worth of pixels instead of 1080p. Auto detection tools said it was 1080p. With xrandr I was able to modify the output to 1027p so I didn’t lose the edges of the display to the TV’s broken forced overscan design. Could you do that with Wayland?

I am serious, and I’ll tell you exactly what will change my mind. I need real tools instead of “upgrades” that have less functionality and are less usable. If Wayland (or whatever comes next) can deliver on functionality, I’ll sing its praises. For now I’m on X.

Give me real tools or get off my lawn rewilded patch of native plants and bugs!

This is why X11 is better. I’d rather have settings like this in a text file that I can copy over to my next machine than have to navigate a UI that will change on a different DE or the next upgrade.

Backwards compatibility, portability, and text-based interfaces are a virtue.

X config files aren’t “hacky scripts”, they are fundamentally more powerful, customizable, usable, and future-proof. Xrandr is a powerful and capable interface with applications across the system.

When Wayland adopts these kinds of powerful interfaces with decades of refinement I’ll switch to it. I don’t want to keep track of whether my DE uses wlroots or gnome or plasma and their independent/redundant/feature-lacking randr alternatives. Randrs should be more fundamental to the display operation than the DE. Wayland is fundamentally hacky and broken.

Edit: thank you all for the discussion. I’d like to clarify a point. I don’t just want a text file with configuration settings that implement features that I need to beg/bother the devs for. They are likely to have better things to do and it might not be a priority for them. I want access to powerful tools via the configuration files that I can make do pretty much anything if I read the documentation. Xrandr is such a tool. I don’t want setting for a feature that has to be baked into the DE which I have to beg to have implemented and which will be implemented differently across different DEs. I want flexible, dynamic, modular tools.

Specifically that characterization is what I see as inaccurate. Wanda was wacky and irresponsible, too. Cosmo was just more of a ditz about it.

Inaccurate format, mischaracterizes Cosmo and Wanda.

Gotta keep going to the grocery store. Food doesn’t just grow on trees, you know? Not like it can just be out in the environment with us where we live and work.

Fair, nails are extremely useful. They also contain a lot of bacteria that can ruin fermentation experiments. Other tools exist.

ratfucking on Sunday before super Tuesday

Ummm, what is this referring to?