billiard

Helen & George would sell a book for a price of a billiard table and give a billiard table for free with every purchase.

It's probably because the view is so zoomed-out that you can see how smooth the earth really is - it's smoother than a billiard ball proportionally.

Every now and then people (on HN and elsewhere) like to rediscover pilot-wave theory and other similar ideas that posit that billiard-ball-like-particles still describe the universe.

All of those materials are worse for professional play than modern billiard balls made from composite plastics.

Only there it displays ability to exchange momentum with one other single atom as if two billiard balls hit.

Ok, the physicalist says, consciousness does not arise from little material billiard balls bumping into one another.

To gain intuition about classical computation and it's physical implementation, you could consider the billiard ball computer[3].

In other words, the billiard ball would simply bounce off the entrance to a closed time-like curve.

Celluloid was also used to replace ivory in billiard balls, which was better than the clay and wood balls used earlier.

Twenty years ago, the only room in Arkansas with real billiard tables was a local place that catered to Vietnamese immigrants.

What they do do is bounce off, which is where the billiard-ball analogy comes in.

I know there are differences between the plastic toy and the fortune-telling billiard-ball, but are they meaningful?

I'll go ahead and throw these out there, too, so everybody can see comparable "masterpieces" in other billiard games...

Nobody ever called physics “lever science” or “billiard ball science.” The fatal error in computer science was that it modeled complex systems without truly understanding them.

The dominant interpretation that treats the wavefunction as made of "probability stuff" is surely the statistical/ensemble interpretations, or even "shut up and calculate." Billiard ball theories like de-Broglie Bohm are definitely a minority viewpoint, and not representative of those that deny ontological status to the wavefunction.