It looks like it given the symbols used. P for pressure, rho for density etc. u-arrow is definitely a vector field, so it could be fluid flow. Otherwise it could be equally anything described by a vector field, like electromagnetism or gravity but they usually have a lot more E and G involved I think. I used to solve these but then I got a certificate so now I don’t have to.

This is beautiful. Shutting down the discourse completely by virtue of being inarguably correct. I applaud this comment.

There definitely is an element of people just not liking it because it’s new, but there’s also an element of not getting any say in it whatsoever.
Also, they really do get in the way. They make it harder to get a good seal between your mouth and the bottle at any angle, and at the top they hit your nose. They are slightly harder to use, especially if you’re using one hand for any reason, including if you only have one hand. Removing them without tools results in a sharp bit of plastic which pokes and irritates your skin.
Finally, this is another patronising effort which makes consumers lives more difficult (by whatever amount) while not doing enough to combat plastic waste.

Palestine ≠ Hamas.
Since your entire argument hangs on us accepting the opposite, you should probably find a new one mate.

Or, alternatively, having enough energy for everyone would mean no more population problem. Many thousands of people smarter than you and I believe that fusion power is feasible, and in our lifetime, and have dedicated their entire professional lives to that goal.
It’s an insult to them to have wave it away like this.

Eggs is a different topic

~again you, saying that eggs are separate from veganism.

You appear to be disagreeing with yourself, never mind me.

Veganism IS morally correct

~that’s you. That’s you talking about veganism.

You’re proving my point quite nicely

Veganism is the topic. Vegans don’t eat eggs.

I don’t think you get to make a black and white, general argument about this. How about this: if a person raises and cares for a chicken, giving it a charmed life it would have otherwise never had, but takes and eats its unfertilised eggs, then that’s not morally wrong.
It’s just not as obvious as people think, and your first sentence is a naive oversimplification and a great example of the kind of lazy argument I’m talking about. But I don’t want to get into it with my friends since it’s such a touchy subject, and I’ll never get a decent conversation about it online.

I love vegans. A few of my friends are vegan. There are two things some vegans will say which boil my piss, however. First is that they have a moral high ground because they don’t eat animals. This isn’t a given, it’s a complex and nuanced argument I’d happily partake in if the other party weren’t approaching it with a top-down belief that they’re already in the right. Second is the notion that we should all be vegan to save the planet from climate apocalypse. I don’t want this comment to get too long, but I have multiple problems with this faulty line of reasoning, and it muddies the waters. The only likely effect of it is that less progress is made on stopping global heating. So the upshot is that these people are literally sacrificing the ecosystem they purport to care about in order to bang their drum. Fuck that.

Time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

You’ve found the source. This is outright plagiarism.

crickets

How is Boost still working for you? I just get a failed to refresh message

It’s CAROL!

What if being hammered silly by a pneumatic fist is my plan?

🫦

I have to draw this line because it’s actually really important.
Smoking is when someone inhales smoke.
Vaping is when someone inhales vapour.
These are different in more ways than they are similar, but perhaps the most important is the difference in negative health outcomes. Smoking is about twenty times more harmful than vaping.
Vaping is a very effective path away from smoking for those with a nicotine dependency, and it’s counterproductive to attach the same stigma to both, let alone to consider them equivalent.