The whole debate around climate change is retarded. Whether it's real or not, it will never change the fact that:
1) you must respect the Earth and its life by direct or indirect choices;
2) you should not tolerate any restriction of individual freedom from the government.
If you read this correctly, you'll realize it applies to everyone.
Retard here. So the observable universe (OU) is the pic within pic related, with my own shit added in. I want to ignore the speed of light, if possible, because obviously if we look towards the source of the BB, we'll look back in time.
My questions are as follows:
1) Are we at the edge of an expanding sphere? Or somewhere in the middle? Poorly attempted to draw with this the two red lines. The first red line would indicate we are near the edge. So if we take a telescope and look to the right, would we see less stars? Equally, when we look to the left, would we see more stars? The second red line is if we are somewhere in the middle, or whatever, and there is more universe (and OU) expanding to our right.
2) Someone once told me, many years ago, that the universe (not the OU) is actually an expanding sphere, upon which we are on the perimeter. That is, there is nothing between us and the Big Bang. We are following one part of this spherical ring, in one direction.
3) Another one I heard is that the universe (not the OU) is actually a flat ring, not a sphere.
4) With 2) and 3) in mind, whether a sphere or ring, is there only a universe (not OU) at the perimeter of the ring, or would we find stars littered all the way back to the Big Bang? I understand that when we look now, we look into the past and see lots of stars, but do we think there are stars there NOW?
5) What is near the Big Bang? Now. Is it empty, due to expansion? Or will there be stuff left behind. Possibly answered by question 4).
tl,dr I'm trying to figure out the scientific consensus on whether the universe (not OU) is a sphere or ring, whether galaxies only exist on the edge or whether there is stuff all the way back to the BB.
Hi everyone, today I'd like to take some of your time and attempt to explain a cryptographically verified function set operating on linked nodes.
This has the slightly dirty word blockchain attached to it, but only because I find myself stumped at certain points and need to use the term to forward some of the validity of this system. (I am a very stupid individual, so I will not explain this correctly, and understanding this will require some leaps over gaps that will be filled in by others if it works.)
Here goes: node-array-kernel
Hash function used to verify data exchange.
Data exchange: request, fulfillment, transfer, acknowledge, update
Token is hash value verified by private key that can unlock data stream inside array
Array is multiple nodes computing core functions, hash functions are used to verify data-streams and transactions/transfers.
Node is network-oriented device capable of computing simple hash functions and transferring relevant data through a medium. All data meant to update core computational functions is to be translated to a relevant medium. Nodes are verified through entirely separate functions.
These data exchanges and relevant verifications begin to form the theorized blockchain. This cryptographic "evolving" function is influenced by the relevant DataStream and will produce new tasksets as its kernel functions become more refined.
TLDR; linked nodes operating tasksets beyond coin based transactions, operating on the same array as the coin based transactions, nodes can be used for anything from simulations, to chemical processing systems, to AI feed tubes.
I've had this idea for a while that is based both on anecdote and logical connections to the known effects of porn addiction. Essentially it is that transgender rates have skyrocketed not because that many people were just trans before but could only admit it now, but because people are being programmed by our pornographic society to want to embody their fantasies, they see social utility or mobility in becoming a woman or a man, and because they are being collectively groomed to think that any depressive episodes (which are widespread considering industrialized societies have produced the highest suicide and depression rates in history by many magnitudes) is probably because they have gender dysphoria.
I have a friend who I knew my whole life and when he/she was 18, they told me they were trans. We were both incredibly helpless and depraved porn addicts. Its not until I recovered from my porn addiction about a year ago that I realized just how much porn was warping and poisoning my mind. I was into all kinds of disgusting kinks and fetishes when I was addicted that I have no interest in now and find very repulsive. I also thought I was a 'femboy' or even potentially could see myself as trans, but I am now very proud and grateful for the beautiful gift that is masculinity.
