Gurkenglas

just deduce the domain from text similarity :o)

"Obey so they don't carry out their threat." may be prescribed by classical decision theory, but I wouldn't call it rational when it's bad for you to be known to do it. I just asked classical decision theory what decision theory is best and I think it said "take action x such that, if you do x, and everyone after 15:42 UTC Mar 24, 2023 knew that you'd do x, you'll do as well as possible.". So what deserves to be called "rational" may be to do what the person you wish you were would do.

If we have enough volume that we can't use the most dense possible weight for all of it, we can find cheaper weight materials by dropping the density constraint.

Couldn't you have the weight grip the sides of the tunnel with gears attached to a generator/motor (inside the weight) so the weight wouldn't rip itself apart? It would be the same machinery that ordinarily would operate the pulley at the top, just moved down into the weights (cause with this, you would need no more pulley). (To illustrate why it wouldn't rip itself apart, imagine gaps on the weight every 100 meters.)

If the capacity is proportional to the depth of the tunnel and the mass of the weights, and the maximal mass of the weights is proportional to the depth of the tunnel, then wouldn't the capacity grow quadratically with the invested money?

Edit: You assumed that they can both fill most of the tunnel up with lead and move that up or down 500 meters. The volume that they can fill with that is thus only half of what you say.

1. Those 10% are per year, not per transaction. 2. This kind of inflation is one of many factors that is already incorporated into the market value of Bitcoins.

I think the statement you meant to remind us of is that NP is a subset of PSPACE.

That's from last year.

Maybe by "the same turbine" they mean the generator at the center, having swapped out the short blades shown on their site for a traditional set.

Would turbulences be prevented if 3 radial blades (3 so the 45:15=3fold amount of air can pass without problem) divided the wind from the turbine into 3 funnels as large as the input funnel?

If the wind gets slowed by turning the turbine, shouldn't the output side funnel of the turbine be larger than the input side funnel to be able to hold more air? (So the additional wind coming in from behind doesn't have to waste its own kinetic energy pushing the front air out of the system)