Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About IDoNotCare

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

394 profile views
  1. You're obviously one of the fools I systematically and physically demolished on mainstream hacking a dead forum to spite me with negs. Which would explain why I haven't gotten a single pos.That's pathetic though! Because you didn't unlock ultra instinct and your dojo sucks you're gonna hack a dead website.
  2. I've heard of thread hijacking, I apparently got banned for it, but I haven't heard of post hijacking. It has been substantiated. https://www.quora.com/profile/Gareth-Meredith-5/log I don't own a super computer nor do I know any computer scientists. You're all a buncha neg repping simps
  3. If one extrapolates from my universola it is not easy or cheap in processor's energy requirements, but it is simple. Imagine being able to burn fat without dieting or exercising, or to learn without studying. That's what wonders can come of nanotech which requires we replace the biological components of our bodies which requires we understand how to snatch the electrons in our nerves and synapses which requires that simple yet vast mathematical regime I laid down.
  4. You speak of God https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain Which cannot exist yet as there's too much heat in the universe to allow the vast majority of electrons to be entangled. If you want to understand what entanglement is, two particles create GWs in close proximity, their GWs propagate faster than the particles like electrons can separate. So they're always entangled because the gravitational ripples were equal and opposite and shared the same initial conditions. The problem is most electrons, like the electrons in our synapses, have not had time in the universe to a
  5. Sanity is as ill-defined as consciousness. A platitude is just something you say. Like all philosophy. I know what Eise was saying, he called me mental because I said sanity is an axiom. He said my statement was a philosophy because I said it wasn't. He was just antagonizing me as I said. You're also just antagonizing me. Either better comprehend what I wrote or I can't help you. It's in Kurt Mueller's locked topic in speculations So mathematics can define things those words he said cannot even come close to. Whereas you said it couldn't even be stated with mat
  6. Notice Eise's posts are completely off the topic of the validity of philosophy and are purely structured to antagonize me based off of extranous statements made in the posts they are responding to. The patterns of the thoughts behind that communication can be graphed mathematically.
  7. Here's the nuts and boltz, the real mechanics of it along with something you did not consider, the dark matter and energy as directional difference The difference in time particles (4D graviton topologies) can be interpreted as lp1*9^28=hG/c^3 ->c^3=hG/lp1*9^28->c=cuberoot(hG/9^28lp1) Place c^5 into denominator for hG/c^5 for lt0 It has a different rate so even the particles that combine at the central coordinate of the singularity then start evolving inbetween different ticks of a planck clock This is the dark energy mechanism, which at ce
  8. Yes you can. Sanity is an axiomatic platitude, as is the notion of subjective and objective views as well as, for that matter, all philosophy and sensory perception. The only reality is numerical quantification. That which is not numerically quantified in sum, ergo, sum is an ontological fallacy. You have no points, I do have points, very specific points in a graph.
  9. Now those equations were for a curved 3D space, not a flat 3D space (ie https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/08/12/a-spacetime-surprise-time-isnt-just-another-dimension/amp/) linear and nonlinear calculus are two different things
  10. No. And btw, your collective little antisexual sausage fest agenda is about to kick the bucket for real.
  11. All philosophy is useless. What's the point? No, mathematically where are the points that make the laws of nature. Ontological questions are scientific not philosophical they can be mathematically pinpointed of course morality is subjective to benefit the dull creature who didn't understand those coordinates
  12. Everything I said was coherent. It was grammatically correct, the spelling was correct. You just disagreed with the idea of a eutopia.
  13. Well at the very least I'm included first in my perspective of "everyone" assuming others are similar to me biologically.
  14. When I say 3D here's the context The radius in x2=x1-((2(x1))/r) is actually the average formula applied to 2C/pi and C/pi for the 45 degree circle slice of the sphere
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.