this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
154 points (94.3% liked)

Apple

19818 readers
12 users here now

Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Would that mean a grenade rarely causes direct damage? The explosion is really only designed to throw shrapnel

[–] essell@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I guess that comes down to frame of reference..

You don't have to hit a guy with the grenade itself, the indirect shrapnel will do the work.

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, just a thought experiment, because we do consider shrapnel ancillary in the case of a bullet...

I'm not sure if a grenade is a direct or indirect hit

Rockets are similar where we call it a "direct hit" but realistically it's just blowing up a large enough area that the target happened to be in the vicinity...

[–] essell@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Can definitely pick this apart, reminds me of examining forces in secondary school during physics exams.

My thinking on the original point is that shrapnel is never aimed, even if deliberate, as you say it's just there, it comes alongside the attacking action.

Then again, in the sense that shrapnel typically goes directly from one place to another, it's pretty direct