Anon this is your chance to do something great. Please post your inventions so that I can finally have free energy.
Also, I need a spaceship to fly to middle earth.
A Thread for:
Luddites
Tinfoilheads
Antivaxxers
Big Pharma haters
Goyslop haters
Big Tech haters
NASA haters
Technocracy haters
Global warming skeptics
Oldschool Treehuggers
Butlerian Jihadists
Sabine Hossenfelder fans
Physics stagnation conspiracy theorists. Spinoff from >>>sci/1 - starts past the Cheshire cat
Discussion of murders, coverups, and tech suppression
Science as a priesthood propping up Government
Man-Made Horrors Beyond Our Comprehension, i.e. the Doom Brain, >>>sci/475
Academia's sacred cows and how to butcher them
Stories about academic waste, busywork, knob polishing, grifting and straight-up fraud
Stories about getting kicked out of academia due to woke witch hunts or other BS
Stories about academics being herd animals, disconnected from reality, and sometimes quite dumb outside of their narrow fields.
Post your redpills and stories here.
I'll start:
>Famous physicist wants a short paper to plant a flag with his latest theory.
>Easy publication. Probably because he was famous?
>Turns out the theory was seriously flawed due to one false assumption.
>These things happen, which is why flag planting is risky, but so is waiting. It's a gamble either way.
>Back to the drawing board.
>He and his student spend years re-working the theory, making it much better, and running computer simulations to back it up.
>This was the student's Ph.D. thesis. They try to publish two big papers with the student as first author.
>Reviewer slaps his dick on the table and says he's not approving anything without a total rewrite of the simulations to include 3D magnetohydrodynamics and radiation transport.
>Student suggests publishing on arXiv anyways because he thinks the new theory is pretty good.
>Famous physicist says no; says there is peer review for a reason, insists that the reviewer's concerns can be addressed (this was never going to happen)
>Student leaves academia after getting Ph.D.
>The papers, and the famous physicist, get old and die.
>End result: One bullshit paper, one disillusioned young physicist, and a whole lot of wasted time. No clear villains, just a failure of the system.
mans brain on a small cubic glass container, ontop of a chip
container is connected by a tubule that pumps nutrients innit
brain learned to play doom in one week, simply by with strength of mind
the brain is wirelessly connected by usb transmitter into a PC
then it thinks of arrow keys and DOOM guy moves in a 3D space and then it thinks about pressing CTRL and DOOM guy shoots etc.
by using punishment/reward method the cells were electroshocked for mistakes shocks stopped when it had learned to do right
the mans brain is only a small piece of brain, no former memories remain its not even 10% of the size of full brain
cell count is about 800 000 brain neuronal cells
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2517389-human-brain-cells-on-a-chip-learned-to-play-doom-in-a-week/
I suspect those who are enthusiastic about the wonders of science wouldn’t be pushing Cheddar Man if they understood its implications:
>Mr Targett, a 42-year-old history teacher in Cheddar, Somerset, has been shown by DNA tests to be a direct descendant, by his mother’s line, of “Cheddar Man”, the oldest complete skeleton ever found in Britain, and now also the world’s most distant confirmed relative.
>Even the Royal Family can only trace its heritage back to King Ecgbert, who ruled from 829AD to 830AD. By contrast, Cheddar Man, a hunter- gatherer who pre-dated the arrival of farming, lived in 7150BC.
>The news caught everyone by surprise. Mr Targett’s wife, Catherine, said: “This is all a bit of a surprise, but maybe this explains why he likes his steaks rare”.
>The discovery came about during tests performed as part of a television series on archaeology in Somerset, Once Upon a Time in the West, to be shown later this year. DNA found in the pulp cavity of one of Cheddar Man’s molar teeth was tested at Oxford University’s Institute of Molecular Medicine, and then compared with that of 20 people locally, whose families were known to have been living in the area for some generations.
>To make up the numbers, Mr Targett, an only child who has no children, joined in. But the match was unequivocal: the two men have a common maternal ancestor. The mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited from the egg, confirmed it.
Excellent. Now sequence both genomes. If the theory of evolution by natural selection is to remain unfalsified, then there must be at least 10,000 fixated mutations present in Mr. Targett’s genome that are common to all of his neighbors that not present in his ancestor from 300 generations ago.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/the-family-link-that-reaches-back-300-generations-to-a-cheddar-cave-1271542.html
If evolution were actually science, this is a meaningful falsification that would be tested. But, of course, it won’t be, because the primary role of modern scientists is to publish papers declaring that their findings are consistent with Darwin’s fairy tale, not subject the fairy tale to genuine scientody.
Microscope pictures for your enjoyment. You can buy a good digital microscope for as low as $20 now so I hope others contribute to this. Please do not post the dick pics of liberal men in this thread. Electron microscopes are too expensive.
Do you prefer the term 'nuclear pile' or 'nuclear reactor'
What's the science to animate walk cycles and such? And the realistic phyiscs of it? Thanks.
What makes them gravitate towards prehistoric life and claim it for their delusions and mental illness? Those same Dinosaurs and prehistoric mammals would tear them to shreds and eat the insides yet they get off to imagining random Trexes having homosexual intercourse. They are obssesed proving these things and lash out whenever you objects, it is quite honestly disturbing.
What mental gymnastics do they perform to conform portrayal of prehistoric life to their delusions? It boogles my mind because i cant find a logical connection?
Does "human petting everything" meme have to do anything with it. Is it the "fluffy cute creatures" portrayal of prehistoric life? It cant be just raptors with feathers.
It really makes me sick when i see this nonsense. Prehistory and paleontology used to be cool and gritty, even adventerous in the past, but its all fake and gay.
>soybear goes extinct
checks out
This is the Micro-Nova Thread
Links:
>suspicious0bservers.org/
>ezekielsfire.com/03-section-one-the-science.html
>dieholdfoundation.com
Vids:
>youtube.com/@dieholdfoundation6705
>youtube.com/@SpaceWeatherNewsS0s
>youtube.com/@mudfossiluniversity
Books:
>annas-archive.org/md5/098afbbc88f11d1e0971c43b45051ecf
>annas-archive.org/md5/033ec02663125a0162b70a9caa52f39e
Papers:
>scholar.google.com/citations?user=n0C8VzgAAAAJ&hl=en
Frens:
>archive.ph/tJqNI
Italy’s National Research Council (INRC) Turned Light Into A Supersolid, For The First Time:
A single baseball size ball of this supersolid light would weigh only between 0.21'grams to 0.24'grams...
also this ball will produce inbetween 19.1'MW million megawatts to 21.8'MW million megawatts of power...
for reference, 0.21'grams to 0.24'grams is equivalent to the weight of a feather, or a paper clip, or a grain of rice...
and power-wise, a 19.1'MW million megawatts to 21.8'MW million megawatts of power is equivalent to the to the power of a large city's energy consumption, its equivalent to the power needed to light up a small country, its equivalent to the energy produced by a large nuclear power plant.
Archived News Release:
https://archive.md/zblxV
The Greeks considered geometry to be the most important subject out of all and applicable to every area of life. Vibration organizes matter, however this is not just limited to merely sound as demonstrated vid below, but also applies to EM vibrations and other more subtle waves as well. We see the same shapes (geometry) everywhere, and with the eyes to see, you may as well.
>Cymatics: Chladni Plate - Sound, Vibration and Sand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFAcYruShow
>The Bubbleologist - The Code - Episode 2 - BBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKvT1lRWhE0
ITT anime girls with the demon core
HYPERBARIC OXYGEN MEDICINE = FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH
https://youtu.be/QfdwLtPj5EY?t=756
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhympAfm0TY until 2:15
_________
>Improve cerebral blood flow, brain metabolism, and brain microstructure, leading to improved cognitive functions, physical functions, sleep
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8533945/
>Promote proliferation of neural stem cells and stimulate neurogenesis
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4810995/
>Improvement in IQ, memory, attention, executive functioning
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8888529/
>Can stop the aging of blood cells and reverse the aging process.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/11/201120150728.htm#:~:text=A%20new%20study%20indicates%20that,younger%20as%20the%20treatments%20progress
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33206062/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8660605/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3231808/
_________
>VA to Provide Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy to Some Veterans with Chronic PTSD
https://news.va.gov/press-room/va-to-provide-hyperbaric-oxygen-therapy-to-some-veterans-with-chronic-ptsd/
>Significant improvement in impulsivity, mood, anxiety, overall quality of life scores
- https://www.amenclinics.com/services/hyperbaric-oxygen/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5674654/
>30-min increase in total sleep time and a 16-min reduction in sleep onset latency
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28000381/
_________
>Restores skin / removes wrinkles
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3977684/
>Reduces inflammation, oxygenates injured muscle, and regenerates skeletal muscle
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29358697/#:~:text=Hyperbaric%20oxygen%20reduces%20inflammation%2C%20oxygenates,macrophage%20and%20satellite%20cell%20activation
>Restores hearing
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369993/
>it also heals brain damage, as you can see from the op pic
Go over this with medical professionals.
Get a referral & see a Hyperbaric Physician.
AAAAAH I need to know what's underneath the ice!
Colloidal silver works by interfering with the metabolic processes of microorganisms, particularly through its interaction with proteins
>Was commonly used from 1890-1945
>Became popular again because of the internet
>Wholefoods sold it on their shelves until Covid-19
>Now it's a schizo-tier meme
Have you ever tried it?
I spent days trying to get AI to consneed the information I provided above.
I think I'm going to try it.
Smurfs are cool.
You guys have any idea on what interventions I could undertake to accomplish this? Just like excess pornography, flicking between windows all day is very bad for your brain
What do ya think of this?
https://milesmathis.com/science.pdf
I was just going to put up a link to my science site, to remind you that if you run out of things to read
here on my art/history site, there are about 800 other papers on my science site, going back 25 years,
and not all of them are full of difficult math. There is a link at the top of my homepage, of course, but
most people never visit that—they just bookmark my updates page. So some don't even know I have a
second site. I do this now because I have posted a lot of papers this year so far over there, and most of
them are short and don't require much knowledge of science. They are just me dunking on the
mainstream, so the same thing you find on this site but with a science flavor. Mainstream physics is
currently imploding after years of being strafed by me, and even mainstream scientists on Youtube and
other places are starting to admit that, see Sabine Hossenfelder as just one example. She doesn't
promote me, of course, that isn't allowed, but she is admitting physics, astronomy, and science
academia are in a freefall, and may not survive in their current forms. So these are very interesting
times, and I didn't want you to miss out on the fun.
But then I thought, why just leave a raw link when I can flesh it out a bit, perhaps helping you to
understand what is really going on. Most of you know me as the guy who is blowing the cover of
every Intelligence project in history, but some in the know think my science is even more important
and revolutionary, and they are probably right. So if you haven't spent any time over there or don't
have any science chops, I will give you a thumbnail sketch of why they think that.
My science site has been quietly superviral for many years now. By “quietly” I mean almost no one
knows it, because I am not promoted by anyone but me. The mainstream has not only refused to cover
any of my big discoveries, they have refused to report on my astonishing success online—which is just
as incredible a story. The only ones who know it are people at Google, the Air Force, NASA, and
places like that, and they aren't happy about it. They have been trying to put a lid on it since the
beginning, and it got very serious about six years ago, when Google began completing delisting me.
Not just downlisting me, but refusing to list me at all. Other search engines like Bing and Yahoo then
followed. We knew this was true since at first we could compare Google to Bing, and when Bing
began delisting me we could compare to Yandex, which was still listing based on numbers, as they
should. Now Yandex has started delisting me, so I guess you will have to get your information in the
future from toilet stalls.
On my art/history site, you have seen evidence of that as well, since I have posted recent screenshots
proving my papers are going to #1 immediately at Yandex, and sometimes even at Google and Bing.
That happened with my paper on the fake Trump assassination attempt, for example. And there are a
few of my old papers on both sites Google has failed to censor. I have so many papers up some of
them miss the net, I guess.
At that last link you can see that I was ranking above Wikipedia, the Dictionary, and all university sites
on many topics, which was unheard of. I saved some of the screenshots as proof. It had never been
achieved by anyone, but especially not by a one-man self-published site with no institutional
connections. This was of major concern to the mainstream, because up to then their response had been
to ignore me and claim I was a crank with no penetration. But the Google results disproved that with
huge exclamation points. And my numbers could not have been due to ignorant “Flat Earth” readers,
as they claimed, since my most-read papers were on subjects only professional physicists or
astronomers or mathematicians could comprehend. Youtube dopes would not be clicking on papers
with titles like “The Drude-Sommerfeld Model”, “The Perihelion of Mercury”, or “The Fractional
Quantum Hall Effect”. No, this indicated that mainstream scientists from the universities and labs were
secretly mobbing my papers, reading them at home under the covers with a flashlight and then denying
it at work.
The catastrophe for the mainstream went into overdrive in 2020, when I made a big prediction about
Solar Cycle 25, which was just starting at that time. The mainstream also tries to dismiss me by
claiming I don't make any predictions and don't reference mainstream experiments, which was always a
lie—but the lie got much bigger in 2020. I have never done anything else except go through
mainstream papers and theories with a fine-tooth comb, correcting them, rewriting them, and showing
my readers exactly what it must mean. Same thing I do on my history site. But in 2020 I was able to
do what no one had ever done: predict a Solar Cycle by first explaining the mechanism and then
showing how that mechanism physically created the data. That paper is pretty dense and you may not
be able to follow it. Lots of graphs. But the long and short of it was that I showed the cycle was
caused by an electromagnetic feedback loop between the Galactic Core, the Sun and the four big
planets. So all I had to do is track the big planets, looking at alignments. When the planets were most
in line to the Sun/Core, we would have a maximum. I then simply predicted sharp spikes in the
sunspot data on planetary alignments. There have been six of those so far in this cycle, and they all hit
right on schedule, which was like shooting the mainstream in the heart six times. After the first one
hit, mainstream scientists at NOAA and NASA and places like that were so panicked they called Air
Force for help, which took over sunspot counting for the first time ever. It was soon clear why Air
Force was there: they began faking all the data, sitting on sunspots numbers to make it look like I
wasn't right. Sunspots can be very small or very large, so their favorite trick was to mis-weigh the big
ones, counting them as about half as large as they should have been. I have proved that in a series of
papers. Even with that trick, they still failed to keep numbers down enough, and Cycle 25 was MUCH
larger than they predicted. But pretty much exactly what I predicted. Even better, their trick of
suppressing big spots didn't get rid of the spikes on planetary alignments, I guess because Air Force
didn't get the memo to hit those days extra hard. They only got the general memo to suppress by about
75% across the board, but didn't realize there were specific spikes to suppress. So those spikes
remained in the data, proving I was right.
But I have done things much larger than that, starting with diagramming the atomic nucleus. There
were a few attempts to do that back in the 1940s, but but they soon gave up. Their data was very
limited, and more importantly they were terrible at visualization. Physicists in the 20th century were
generally very limited math geeks, especially the ones in theory, and they were the least artistic
scientists in history. This is because of the influence of Bohr and Heisenberg, mainly, who taught
physicists to avoid diagrams and illustrations. They hated them. And they hated them because they
couldn't read them. Their brains didn't work like that and they honestly couldn't fathom diagrams.
Mach admitted he was confused by the real world and feared walking into distant mountains. No
really, I am not making that up. And Bohr wasn't much better. These guys were just short of legally
blind.
So when I came along in about 2000, the standing nuclear diagram was just a bag of marbles. If you
consulted nuclear theory, you were told all the protons and neutrons inhabited the same spot. Yes, they
dodged into the quantum blur thing there as well, just like with their orbiting electrons. Everything was
a probability and you shouldn't even try to visual anything. It couldn't be done, they told us. Nature
didn't make sense and you were a fool to expect it to.
But I never bought it. Everyone with any sense always knew that couldn't be right. And I had a leg up
in the problem beyond being an artist, because I knew going in that the nucleus was channeling the
charge field through it. No one else before me knew that, so they couldn't build the nucleus as a charge
engine. So once again I had a mechanical hook no one else had. I knew why the nucleus was built like
it was even before I built it, you see. I knew the architecture had to channel charge.
And what is this charge I am always talking about? It is the old +/- on the proton and electron, that the
mainstream already knew about, so I didn't make it up. I just made it a real field of real photons. The
mainstream had known about charge since the time of Ben Franklin, but no one had ever thought to
make it a real field of real particles. It was just treated as a propensity or something. As with
diagramming the nucleus, they had given up trying to explain charge long long ago. In the 1990s it was
defined as a message between particles. No, seriously. A message. Through Facebook, I guess.
Historically, it was Maxwell's old D-field, and as such was just more math. It was a ghostly field that
lay under the EM field, but since Maxwell never figured out exactly what it was, and since his students
were way dumber than he was, they just buried it. Basically no one talked it about for 150 years until I
dug it up and re-animated it, showing it was the primary real field in the universe, the greater part in a
unified field theory, and 95% of all current energy.
In most of the problems I solve, it is overlooked as ambient heat. It is real photons peaking in the
infrared, so it is mostly out-of-sight and invisible. It remains even in a vacuum, since a vacuum is an
ion vacuum. You can't create a charge vacuum, since whatever you make your walls out of will still be
emitting charge. Plus, everything is porous to charge. And on the Earth, everything is in the Earth's
heavy charge field. Physicists always forget that, which is why they can't ever explain anything, from
entanglement to the double-slit experiment to dark matter. All their theories are missing 95% of the
total field.
So you can think of charge as a powerful photon gas that drives and animates all things. Like the
Force, if you will, but completely real, made up of real particles with real masses, real radii and real
spins. It determines the architecture of everything, starting with the nucleus. The nucleus is built for
one thing and one thing only: to channel charge. At each atomic number, you will find a specific
architecture that channels charge the most efficiently at that size. The nucleus has to be built this way
because if it is built wrong, the charge field will quickly tear it apart, from inside and out. Any
imbalance will be fatal. It is like building a house in a high wind or powerful wind tunnel, but in this
case you let the wind move both around the house and through it.
You start by building the rooms of the house. In the atomic nucleus, these rooms are mostly the same:
Helium nuclei. That is just two protons and two neutrons in a bulletproof configuration, allowing
charge to move right through the structure—in at the poles and out the equator. You then build up all
nuclei from those rooms, taking great care to place adjacent rooms in the right configuration, to allow
charge to channel through while pushing the rooms together at the same time. Yes, if you fit the rooms
together in the right way, the charge acts like a glue, keeping the house super-tight. It isn't an actual
glue, it just presses things together, again like a very strong wind.
What else have I done that no one had before? Well, I solved the mystery of superposition. The
mainstream has known that a particle may have two states at the same time, one state “superimposed”
on the other. Meaning, one right on top of the other somehow. But how? That they couldn't say.
Again, they just dealt with it mathematically, but didn't try to explain it physically, because they
couldn't. They often resorted to just calling the states red/blue or something, since they couldn't
distinguish them with real mechanics. This ended up infecting everything, including most famously
quark theory, where they promoted this mechanical ignorance as a sexy novelty, calling quarks
top/bottom, charmed, or strange. People then got Nobel prizes for that mess and it was cemented into
place permanently. Like everything else, you weren't allowed to question it.
Their superposition math usually worked, since they had fit it to experiments over many years, but in
some experiments it stopped working. Things started happening that didn't make any sense. Detectors
were detecting things they shouldn't have. To explain these “weird” findings, they used even more
slippery math, summing over all possible states to again find probabilities. To go with that slippery
math, they added equally slippery interpretations, by which a particle was going through two slits at the
same time, or maybe even taking all possible paths, with all possible spins. The real result was then
“decohering” out of the vacuum by some magic, the magic usually requiring you to look at it. Before
you looked at it, it was just a blur, but with an observer it entered the universe and took one form
instead of all the others.
No really. That was really the state of physics in the 20th century, and still is. Murray Gell-Mann,
probably the third most famous physicist since 1920, after Hawking and Feynman, thought even Mars
was a probability, and said so in his 1994 book The Quark and the Jaguar. It didn't really exist until
someone looked at it in a telescope. You may think these guys were just taking a piss, and maybe they
were, but if so they have never admitted it. That is still mainstream physics.
So how did I solve it? Very simply, as usual, starting with drawing a picture, which allowed me to see
that the two superimposed states weren't just math, they were real spins. But they weren't two similar
spins, just pasted on top of one another; they were spins in different planes and of different sizes. The
inner spin was an axial spin, like a basketball player spinning a basketball. But the outer spin was endover-end, like a car crashing in a spectacular Hollywood scene. This was done to get the second spin
outside the influence of the inner spin. The outer spin has a radius twice that of the inner, so they don't
interfere with one another. This puts the outer spin in another plane, and that plane is at a right angle to
the first spin.
This explains the weird experiments, because it explains why some detectors were detecting the inner
spin while others were detecting the outer spin. The detector is in one plane or another, but not both, so
you have to track which spin it will be detecting. Sometimes it won't detect anything, when you think
it would, and that is because it is in the wrong plane.
You can see how that is a bit tricky, and why they would have missed it for a century without the right
illustration. It becomes pretty obvious with a good illustration, but as I have said, these guys weren't
artists. They weren't visual at all. They were the nerds who thought a lime green polyester shirt went
with orange slacks, so how are they going to see stacked spins?
What next? How about unification. This was the big project of Einstein and for a long time it was the
biggest unsolved problem of physics. Still would be if I hadn't solved it, but they gave up on it a long
time ago. Einstein made no real progress on it, and those that came after just mucked it more and
more, until they finally decided to pretend it didn't matter. By 1990 they had given up on unification
and began replacing it with containment. That is what gauge theories are: they no longer even claim to
unify, they just claim to put gravity and EM in the same big operators and call it a day. They put
gravity and EM in the same room and claim they have achieved a marriage. Though they can't say how
copulation would ever occur. These new gauge solutions don't allow them to answer any real
mechanical questions, since they contain no mechanics. It just gives them another opportunity to dump
an endless ugly math on you, like String Theory.
How did I solve that one? Well, I turned the problem inside out, showing that they didn't even need to
unify gravity and EM (electromagnetism) since they were already unified without anyone knowing it.
You see, they weren't really trying to unify gravity and EM, they were trying to unify Newton's gravity
equations with Maxwell's EM equations. Seems like the same thing, but it isn't because as it turns out,
Newton's gravity equations were already unified. Same for Maxwell's equations. Newton had fit his
equation to an experimental result, and that result was due to a compound field, that field being unified.
But because Newton predated the EM field, he had no way of knowing that. Later in the 19th century,
when EM arose, no one realized that EM had been hiding in Newton's equations all along, hidden by
the constant G. So I started out years ago unwinding G, showing what it really was. Until I came
along, G was just an unassigned constant. No one had any idea what it was. It made the equation
work, that is all. It filled a hole in the equation. But I realized that constant had to be representing
something. More than that, I recognized it must be representing a second field in the equation. A
whole other thing the mainstream had missed for centuries. With some more work, I was able to match
it in size to the EM field. I showed it fit the known size of the EM field, based on known values like
the Ampere, the Joule, the Coulomb, and so on.
So instead of unifying Newton's equations and Maxwell's equations, which were already unified, what
was necessary was pulling apart the old equations and showing what they really stood for. Once all the
variable and constants were re-assigned to real parameters, we could put them back together, achieving
re-unification that way. We then didn't have just one unified field equation, we had many. Not only
were Newton's and Maxwell's equations unified, Gauss' equations were unified as well, and so was the
Lagrangian.
Are Synthetic RNA's obsolete or am I missing something? I have to be missing something.
pTNAs may bring the blade runner timeline and I'm trying to get more research on it, but there's few. I want this to be a synthbio board if anything.
We're running out of time.
There is an idea that due to the weakening of the earths geo-magnetic field, its crust will shift along with corresponding death devastation and despair. Can any /sci/entists weigh in on this.
THIS IS NOT A DRILL
I REPEAT
THIS IS NOT A DRILL
AGARTHA IS REAL
>A hidden structure has been discovered inside the Earth's core
hello, seems like this board is a bit too slow for general questions thread so i'll just ask like this.
Is there a good source for optics at around undergrad level? im in compsci, but im getting into physically based rendering, and i would like to learn general light behaviour.
i know about PBRT, i want something more pure physics.
https://kurganfiction.substack.com/p/implications-of-the-theory-of-dual
If you have not read the full essay by Gaius Baltar regarding what I am labelling his theory of dual brain processing, it is here: https://ourchan.org/sci/thread/344.html
His article is fairly long, detailed, and brilliant.
What I will do here instead is summarise it and then begin to address some astonishing and important consequences of his theory that I believe follow from it.
These are not speculations but observations that fit perfectly with my own lived experience of studying the human mind and brain for about 20 or 25 years with my usual obsessive curiosity on topics that interest me.
I have been a clinical hypnotist for now 20 years but my interest in the mind and brain predates that by several years. The testing, study, practical application and observations I gathered in that time are solid things that have been observed in a variety of contexts, from my life-long practice of martial arts to my work in the construction industry.
The point is that Baltar’s theory has been like a key that finally addresses things I have noticed for decades —and to which there seemed to be no clear answer or solution— and turns that lock with a frictionless precision that opens a veritable vault of answers that all suddenly bridge gaps of understanding in a cascading avalanche of awesomeness.
It will probably take me weeks and months to even address all of these things to any degree, but more importantly, I think my approach to humans and humanity as a whole is forever affected by this dual brain processing theory of his.
The implications of it are so far-reaching in almost every aspect of human communication and thinking capacity that it affects literally everything. In this post I want to address (however briefly and superficially for now) the implications relating to communication between the sexes and why it seems to have degraded so badly over the last few decades, but more importantly, how this theory can be used to address it and improve it.
First a brief summary of his theory.
You need to grasp at least the basics of the dual brain processing theory of mind (I made this name up as Mr. Baltar seems to have not given his theory an official name, and I will henceforth refer to it as such) if you are to be able to use it in your life.
In a nutshell the dual brain processing theory of mind (DBTM) is that your left brain hemisphere processes things logically, analytically, linearly, precisely or mathematically and mostly consciously, while your right hemisphere processes them inductively, statistically, probabilistically, intuitively and mostly unconsciously.
This is not new and has been known for some time and various experiments have proven the difference in the aspects of brain hemispheres for decades and even more than a century now.
What Baltar’s idea did however, is point out that the ability of one hemisphere can be superior to the other (which —given brain plasticity— is something that almost certainly can be guided from early childhood depending on what experiences one is subjected to).
Intelligence is measured mostly by IQ tests and these are very valid as we have mountains of data on them now, since they too have been administered for many, many, years to now literally billions of people; and regardless of how many people may be upset by the fact that IQ is a valid measurement of intelligence that has consistent predictability regarding abilities of humans at various levels of intelligence, it remains true nonetheless.
It is also known that IQ can be very high in one regard but not as high in others. A good example of this is Vox Day. He has an admittedly high intelligence in certain aspects of data processing of information, but by his own admission he is functionally retarded when it comes to spatial reasoning. He told me he literally cannot do children’s three dimension puzzles, and I think he stated also his wife has banned him from using power tools. Understandable, since I imagine if he ever used a chainsaw, the headline would be horrific.
I also noticed a pattern in women with above average intelligence that was difficult to reconcile until I read Baltar’s theory, and it was this: highly intelligent women, who clearly had a quick mind and a capacity for seeing things I might have missed or correlations that were interesting, creative and valid in certain contexts would seem to (still!) be almost incapable of thinking logically.
Though undoubtedly apparently smart, they would be as absolutely solipsistic as ever. They would ignore blindingly obvious logic that indicated they were in error in other aspects that affected their lives in not insignificant ways.
I am not the only one to have noticed this by any means. All men throughout history have come up with some version of this and various theories have been presented as to why this is.
The emotionality, lack of logical processing power and egotistical solipsism (bordering on rampant narcissism at times) of women has long been known and observed and even more so in recent years.
My take on it for decades, which is still valid in the context of Baltar’s theory, is that these differences are biological and due to the different survival pressures women have been subjected to when compared to men (see Caveman Theory or my TMOS series).
While it is pretty certain that their different biology is the cause of the difference in behaviour, and as such I had (like most men) tried to make my peace with it as best I could, there is still an element of free will and agency in the behaviour of women, of course, and my tendency has been to judge them on the basis that if I have the presence of mind and self-restraint to not murder everyone that pisses me off, despite the hormone of testosterone that courses through my veins and brain, then, surely, women can exercise a minimum of logic to not behave like self-absorbed narcissists throughout their day.
Obviously I am exaggerating for the sake of effect, but you know what I am trying to put into evidence here. And yet… very often, the apparent disregard for anyone and everyone displayed by women remained mostly a rather disappointing and bitter pill to swallow.
One only needs to notice how women behave at checkout tills, underground barriers, ATM machines and so on, when compared to men, to see that women act far more than men as if the procedure that is about to take place (paying, tapping your pass on the reader, getting your bank card into the machine) is a complete surprise no one could have anticipated at all, so we must now all wait while she rummages through her bag to find the card she uses 50 times a day but never knows exactly where it is in her bag/wallet/pocket, etc.
In my youth this aspect of female behaviour resulted in endless arguments.
Later I made my peace with their inability to do logic. Later still I discovered the IQ gap and realised that what I had thought bridgeable was in fact a chasm that could not be crossed. (Which applies to men and women equally, perhaps even more so to men, since there is no sexual interest in them as far as I am concerned, to possibly alleviate the distance).
I never really gave much thought to my 155 or so IQ. Mostly I assumed it just meant I figured out things faster than most but I was never of the idea it made me “superior” in some overarching way. It made me faster and more effective, but when I was young, in my teens, I was under the delusion that anyone could do what I did if I just explained it to them. Maybe slower, but it was just a matter of speed.
By my twenties I had realised that some brains just could never do certain things.
Nathaniel, a store keeper working in my father’s construction firm, was simply incapable of grasping the concept of square meters. I spent a week patiently trying to explain it to him with examples, exercises, measurements on site, drawing it out, sketching it… but it was all to no avail.
He wanted to understand too. He just couldn’t.
He was also the most honest human being I ever met. So we made him store keeper of the electrical goods because they all came in linear lengths or countable units of material and he did not have to deal with square meters of anything.
Once I learnt that a 30 point IQ gap is essentially unbridgeable, it also shed light on my failed relationships. My first wife is one of the most loyal and kind people I know, and we remain very good friends, but the gap in IQ meant we were simply not suited at all to be husband and wife. Despite genuine affection, we simply could not communicate effectively. And while maybe some men can happily exist with a woman where they have that IQ gap, I am not one of them.
However, even when a woman had an IQ that was in the right general range of about 125+ (and they are not so common) the solipsism didn’t really lessen. And in some cases (wife n. 2 comes to mind) it was actual full blown narcissism (which naïvely I didn’t believe in, much as I don’t believe in werewolves. It’s quite the shock when you discover how wrong you are about such things. And I’d still prefer werewolves over the alternative).
There was some other barrier to communication that i could sense on some level MUST be something that can be figured out objectively. I don’t mean that one can necessarily resolve the issue. But I was sure there was a reason and understanding that reason would also explain if the issue even was resolvable, or under what circumstances it might be. I sensed this was the case on some level, because we live in an objective universe and while we might not always figure things out, everything has a way that it can be understood. Maybe not by me. Maybe not this century, but somehow, somewhere there was a reason. That would be my left logical brain hemisphere concluding it. But the sense of it existing was my right brain hemisphere giving me the sensation but not quite enough information for my left brain to figure it out (until I read Balter’s post. Then it all clicked!)
The best I could come up with was simply that women’s brains functioned differently because of biology, survival pressure differences from men over millions of years, and a bit of toxic feminism all mixed together.
Nor was I wrong. The female brain is also structurally different, they have more white matter, less grey matter, and a thicker corpus callosum. All biological differences that meant they operate at a less logical and abstract level of thinking, but have a better connection between the hemispheres. The effect is that there is indeed something to the cliché of “female intuition”.
Using Balter’s model, the average woman processes life more as generic probabilistic set of vague beliefs and concepts (right hemisphere) that she would probably struggle to articulate with precision, and instead would likely rationalise (that is justify to herself and others) at whatever level her logic function (left hemisphere) operates at.
Since in general terms the left hemisphere of the brain is less developed in women than men (yes, yes, you are the special exception, but we don’t care dear, we’re dealing with large statistical models here) their “explanations” of why they believe x, y, or z, will tend to seem like dishonest nonsense to a man who has a well developed logic function.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that women tendentially will also actively lie and make shit up consciously to justify their actions, but there are two very important points to keep in mind here too:
Her explanations/rationalisations may be nonsensical not because she is trying to deceive but because she literally does not have the computing power in the left hemisphere to make correct logical analysis of the probabilistic (fuzzy and not precise but nevertheless useful) processes happening in the right hemisphere.
The probabilistic notions of her right hemisphere can be and are affected by life experiences that have significant emotional content.
This can result in things like a woman that has been abused or neglected by a man or her father in her formative years to at some instinctual, unconscious level, assume all men are bad. Because she is not as able to see the internal process of her own right hemisphere (using the left one to analyse it) she will then use easy to find “information” fed to her by the Clown World narrative, and “conclude” how evil men all are, and as a result justify her internal process (which is valid but applies to a specific man, not all men) with a completely flawed “logical” mechanism that most five year olds can see is bad logic. She may herself feel a vague unease at this that makes her unhappy but the “belief” is almost unshakable, because she cannot access her own right hemisphere process due to her limited logical capacity of the left hemisphere.
And this is before we add in any other context like ego, pride, actual selfishness, conscious intent to deceive etc etc.
Another example might be that a woman senses her partner is cheating even if she has no clear idea how she knows. Her right hemisphere has processed millions of microcues and data points unconsciously that tell a story, but the right hemisphere has no words so can’t translate the information to the left hemisphere other than as a feeling or sensation, and her left hemisphere simply cannot see the pattern in the millions of tiny data points. So she is right but can’t really prove it to anyone else, yet her love and sense of loyalty experience a crash of betrayal.
And of course, there is also the tragic process where the woman intuits something about her partner, and labels it as X (say cheating) when in fact it is Y (maybe he secretly took up smoking, or is stressed about the bills, or has cancer and doesn’t know how to tell her) and then acts on it as if X when really it is Y.
This kind of response is unfortunately common between women and men on the spectrum. Their atypical (but not nefarious) modes of internal processing produce microcues that are wildly different from neurotypical people. This is often interpreted in a fear mode by a woman because anything “other” is generally scary to begin with, and the zeitgeist is in any case weird=dangerous. This is not to say women should not trust their internal alarms. Always do. Especially with strangers. However, before imploding your 20 year marriage because you have a “bad feeling” maybe take some time to figure out what that feeling actually comes from.
So much of the behaviour that causes problems between men and women can be understood far better than it ever was before if you consider this model of the mind.
For example, the ability of men to sacrifice for ideals in cold blood is due to having a good logical ability and recognising our objective value when considered in a greater context.
The ability of women to stay in a situation that is horrifying to most people simply because their own emotions are catered to well, or for example to sacrifice themselves for a serial killer —actions that are totally irrational from a logical perspective— suddenly make sense when you understand that her right brain has for whatever reason (usually childhood trauma) latched on to some aspect of the serial killer that literally locks her brain into a “good feeling” and her left brain is incapable of overriding that sensation because her logic functions simply don’t operate at the same level of intensity. Feelings are far stronger in the right aide of the brain and the cold logic of facts is a poor substitute for a genuine hormonal response.
A feminine woman that is being honest and caring, can still appear as deceptive and selfish to a masculine man that processes mostly in the left hemisphere. And such a man, even if honest and caring, can still appear as an inflexible psychopath without human empathy to a woman that processes mostly in the right hemisphere.
And that is BEFORE we add in all the normal and actual human failings we all have in varying degrees.
Despite this difficulty, both sides can still have a sense, inexplicably, that the other person can’t be all bad. They sense there is more to them than their apparent incompatibility (and as far as they are both concerned, the stumbling block is both real and immutable) and without the comprehension of how their brains process in such radically different ways, those stumbling blocks are indeed pretty permanent.
With the realisation and understanding of this theory of mind, however, if you are the type able to do logic well, pretty much all the irritating and immutable habits of the other person now become understood.
Not by some partial theory of the differences being due to biology (they are, but understanding this detail removes the veil that masks it all as mere survival pressure and animalistic traits), but by being able to understand the right brain perspective a woman may be operating under.
A silly example (extreme for the sake of clarity) should help to show the benefits of being aware of this theory.
For the sake of simplicity, we will also assume no one is intentionally trying to deceive anyone or being otherwise “evil”.
Given the above conditions, as you will see from the hypotheticals below, the behaviour of a woman that previously appeared self-absorbed, distant, inattentive, selfish or lazy, is transformed.
Her self-absorption may well be her trying to rationalise why she is still staying in a bad situation when she feels bad yet also feels there is more to it. This would naturally exhaust her, which would mean she is inattentive and tired. A man that is not actually an abusive asshole may still come across as being one to her because he gets upset at the fact that she invariably leaves the toothpaste cap off the toothpaste every morning.
He loses his shit after ten years of the toothpaste cap being left off, after years of reminding his wife of it and her “ignoring it”.
Divorce ensues. Irreconcilable differences. Etcetera.
From his perspective, his wife cared so little about him that she could not be bothered to remember a simple small kindness of putting the cap back on after use.
From her perspective, he loved her less than he did having a neat toothpaste tube.
Both are wrong and both probably genuinely love each other. However…
The man processes left side heavily (say he’s on the spectrum) and has many logical reasons why closing the toothpaste tube matters (flies don’t land on the open toothpaste and contaminate it with excrement from the toilet brush, or whatever). To him, that apparently insignificant action is important. And he can’t understand why anyone who genuinely cared about another person would not do it. Especially since he has explained at length his reasons.
The woman, with all the best of intensions and love for her husband, processes heavily on the right side. Unconsciously, she associates not being criticised for stupid little things as being the only proof of real love. Something she never got from her let’s say abusive father. She honestly does NOT mean to leave the toothpaste cap off. And in fact, every day that she does, and an argument ensues and she feels bad about herself, questions her life choices, assumes her husband doesn’t love her and she herself does not feel loved and so on. It all leads to heartache, arguments and divorce.
So what is the solution?
From the woman’s point of view there simply isn’t one. Eventually she will be worn down and leave. Which explains why 80% of divorces are initiated by women. If asked to explain why she wants to divorce, she will not be able to articulate it beyond “I’m not happy.” Which sounds tragically shallow, and makes most men think women have the heart and humanity of feral and rabid ferrets.
Written by Arctotherium.
If you want to join Britain’s thriving cocaine smuggling industry, you have to be Albanian
One of the few parts of the British economy that has done well since 2008. Source.
There’s no a priori reason why this should be the case. Albanians do not have a racial, cultural, geographic or political affinity for Colombian narcotics. A reasonable and informed observer in 2000 would not have predicted that they would come to dominate the industry. Yet such an obsever would have predicted that some ethnic minority would because organized crime is almost always organized along ethnic lines. This is true even when the ethnic minority is less criminal on average than society at large, as with the Jewish mafia in early 20th century America.
This phenomenon isn’t unique to criminal enterprises. Chaldeans control 90% of the grocery stores in Detroit. 40% of the truck drivers in California are Sikh, and about a third of US Sikhs are truck drivers. About 95% of the Dunkin’ Donuts stores in Chicago and the Midwest are owned by Indians, mostly Gujarati Patels. In New England and New York, 60% of Dunkin’ Donuts stores are operated by Portuguese immigrants. 90% of the liquor stores in Baltimore are owned by Koreans. I am not the first, the tenth, or even the hundredth person to notice this. From a 1999 New York Times article titled ‘A Patel Motel Cartel?’
America's motels constitute what could be called a nonlinear ethnic niche: a certain ethnic group becomes entrenched in a clearly identifiable economic sector, working at jobs for which it has no evident cultural, geographical or even racial affinity.
I don't mean Italians owning pizzerias, or Japanese people running judo schools. I mean, to use an obvious example, the Korean dominance of the deli-and-grocery sector in New York -- a city where the Chinese run most laundries and Sri Lankans, in case you didn't know this, run most porn-video stores. Or the Arabs in greater Detroit, who have a stranglehold on gas stations, or the Vietnamese who monopolize nail salons in Los Angeles. Farther afield, I could mention London's taxi drivers, sharp-tongued in their big black cars, many of whom are Jews from the city's East End; or the security guards outside New Delhi's more affluent residences, virtually all of whom are Nepalese; or the prostitutes in the United Arab Emirates, who are so often women from Russia.
I don’t believe previous writers have really considered the broader implications. The general economic case2 for immigration is that immigration means larger markets and hence more competition, more opportunities for specialization, more economies of scale, and so on. I’ve covered in the past how substantial international trade3 means this doesn’t apply today (small nations benefit from the competition, specialization and scale of the world at large).
The existence of non-linear ethnic niches weakens the economic case for immigration even further. The key point is that immigration fractures national markets. Once a niche is taken over, outsiders can no longer compete in that niche.
There is still competition within ethnic groups inside the niches, but these groups are tiny fractions of the population and often have informal institutions and kinship structures that allow them to act as cartels. In the words of Vishal Shah, a Dunkin’ Donuts store owner in Chicago:
“In Indian culture, if it’s a friend of your father you still call him uncle,” Shah said. “You are family through respect because your parents are friends; everybody’s family.
That makes a big difference on a daily basis in business. “We all help each other,” said Shah, whose family has six stores. “Whenever someone needs something no one ever said I don’t have the time. If your mixer goes down, it’s a matter of a couple of phone calls and you know you’re taken care of.” Likewise, he said, if half his crew gets sick, those same few calls will get him back in business.
What this means is that in vocations taken over by non-linear ethnic niches, modern-day multi-ethnic Chicago has a smaller talent pool to draw from than the smaller but more homogenous4 Chicago of generations past, and the same goes for many American cities.
We can roughly quantify the importance of non-linear ethnic niches by examining levels of co-ethnic hiring in new firms.
By comparison, German immigrants are at 1.8%, British and Canadians at 2.3%, and Italians at 5.2%. Source.
But the chart above significantly understates co-ethnic hiring in cases where the sending countries are themselves multi-ethnic. The correct unit of analysis for the motel industry, for example, is not “Indians” but Gujaratis. For Detroit groceries, it’s the minuscule Chaldean minority, not “Iraqis”. And while the chart tells you how dependent a given country’s immigrants are on these niches, it does not tell you how dominant they are inside them, which is the more important number.5
It’s worth looking at some of the more famous non-linear ethnic niches in the US to get an idea of how they operate.
Cambodian donut shops
Cambodians run about 80% of the donut shops in Southern California (despite being only 0.17% of the state’s population). The Cambodian donut empire got its start with refugee Ted Ngoy, who first learned the trade thanks to an affirmative action program to increase minority hiring at Winchell’s Donuts. The Cambodians were able to completely dominate this traditional American culinary sector through a mix of extended family credit and the use of tong tines, an informal lending club. From a 2016 article by Erin Curtis (p. 113):
The Cambodian variation of the arrangement allowed refugees to swiftly receive and pay back money. The loans were tax-free and interest-free, supporting Kolker's assertion that informal lending clubs exist “to save money, not to make it.” Perhaps most importantly, they made cash “quickly available to those who couldn't otherwise get credit.” As Sokhom notes, tong tines were common for “Cambodians who cannot get a bank loan or did not know how.” Being able to, in Lonh’s words, “kind of avoid the bank” through personal savings, the help of friends and family, or the support of a tong tine allowed Cambodians swifter access to independent business ownership with lower initial expenditures, fewer long-term costs, and less engagement with U.S. financial institutions.
This ability to borrow money cheaply made financing much easier for them than for their American competitors. Once the business was purchased, Cambodians could also keep operating costs down through informal employment of family labor, allowing them to get around expensive income taxes, not to mention labor laws and regulations—including ones around child labor (p. 115).
Notably, Cambodian donut shop owners are notoriously conservative and invest and innovate very little (p. 117). With access to cheaper labor and financing than their American competitors, they have little incentive to boost productivity. And the Cambodian community of Southern California is too small (65,000 people) and lacks the “culture of improvement” required to generate innovations internally.6 From a consumer perspective, this is fine in the short run (efficiency improvements from cheaper labor and financing get passed on as lower prices), but bad in the long run (there’s a hard limit on how much donut shops can improve without innovation). This is analogous to Britain’s infamous 21st century de-automation of car washes in favor of immigrant labor.
Patel motels
Gujaratis, mostly with the surname Patel, run an estimated 42% of the hotels and motels in the United States—despite being only 0.3% of the US population (and an even lower percentage back in 1999 when this was first noticed). Their dominance rises to 80–90% of motels in small town America. The Patel motel cartel got its start with an illegal immigrant, Kanjibhai Desai, in the 1940s. The initial attraction for Patels was that motel ownership did not require English proficiency, and as with the Cambodians, Patel motel owners were able to use informal ethnic loan networks and immigrant family labor brought in via family reunification to undercut their American competitors. Patels now totally dominate the hospitality industry in the US outside of the big chains.
Vietnamese nail salons
Over half the nail salons in the US are run by Vietnamese, which rises to more than 80% in California (they are only 0.7% of the US population). Just like the Patels and the Cambodians, Vietnamese immigrants were able to finance nail salons more easily than American competitors because they had access to below-market credit from family and friends.
Pro-immigration conservatives often celebrate the “entrepreneurship” of non-linear ethnic niches as a route to assimilation, but that’s getting it backwards. As with the Patels, Vietnamese refugees were attracted to nail salons because they didn’t require English proficiency and in fact enabled ethnic separation from core America.7
Vietnamese refugee women are likely to become manicurists because the salon business provides a high degree of autonomy and insulation from an alien—American—culture, language and people.
After the ethnic network was established, Vietnamese owners gained another advantage over non-Vietnamese competitors: better access to workers and training. The language barrier is part of this; once most salon owners spoke primarily Vietnamese, prospective workers had to as well, and cosmetology schools began teaching courses in Vietnamese rather than English. Vietnamese owners and workers could also draw on their ethnic and kinship networks to find each other, avoiding the often cumbersome market hiring process. This plainly goes against the spirit of Civil Rights law in the US, but it’s essentially impossible to apply the laws to informal networks, nor has anyone really tried.
Mechanics
As Thomas Sowell would say: prejudice is free but discrimination has costs. In a market economy, refusing to hire from certain groups means leaving money on the table and being outcompeted by entrepreneurs who will hire from those groups.8 Extra-market forces, such as monopoly or fear of the EEOC driving private diversity efforts, can change this—but that’s not what’s going on here. There is no society-wide push to fill the motel sector with Patels or ensure every nail salon is Vietnamese, and the small businesses they dominate are not monopolies. So how do non-linear ethnic niches work? The common features in all of them are as follows.
They are founded and sustained by first-generation immigrants. This allows niche owners to exploit labor arbitrage through their ethnic and kinship networks in their home countries, and also creates a language barrier that makes it harder to find workers outside the ethnic group and harder for co-ethnics to find work outside the niche. Running a low-prestige small business on tight margins isn’t easy, so second- and third-generation co-ethnics often leave.
They are in low-prestige, low-margin sectors that used to be major avenues of upwards mobility for Americans and in which there is no inherent reason9 for one ethnic group to dominate. Note that this is distinct from an ethnic group becoming prominent in an industry because its traits make them well-suited to the industry (e.g., black dominance of the NBA, Chinese dominance of Chinese restaurants).
The fact that these sectors are small and don’t have much prestige is what allows them to be dominated. The main reason people run motels, small grocery stores, gas stations, nail salons, and donut shops is money—not prestige, status or any other intangible. (This comes across very strongly in the history of the Cambodian donut niche I’ve been relying on: several owners express contempt for the industry but say it’s good money.) And this means that once undercut, non co-ethnics stop trying to enter. Initial advantages can quickly snowball into complete dominance, at which point maintaining the niche is much easier than establishing it in the first place.
They establish dominance through a combination of below-market-rate extended family loans, exploiting labor arbitrage between the US and countries of origin, labor networking within the group, and racial privileges.
The single most important reason non-linear ethnic niches can dominate some sectors of the economy is below-market-rate loans. Small businesses tend to have tiny profit margins, so getting better terms on financing is a huge advantage. Every single article on a non-linear ethnic niche mentions how important credit from extended families and informal ethnic networks is. Americans do not typically have such credit at our disposal: we don’t have ethnic networks and our families are tiny relative to most of the world. Formal sources of credit, like banks or the Small Business Administration, are prohibited from favoring specific ethnic groups—except where they have mandates to favor non-whites in general. We are dependent on society treating us fairly as individuals.
A second advantage these niches have is wage arbitrage between the US and their countries of origin (Vietnam, India, Cambodia, Iraq and so on). American immigration law favoring family reunification and hence chain migration enables this by allowing individual employers to engage in arbitrage outside the requirements of labor visas like the H1-B (it is socially difficult for family members or co-ethnics to change jobs, especially since they often can’t speak English). In the words of Padma Rangaswamy:
The dominance of South Asians in the Dunkin’ Donuts franchise industry in the American Midwest can be explained with reference to many of the classic theories of niche formation—the desire of immigrants for self-employment, contribution of family members, access to cheap labour and informal funding, and group solidarity. But its unique trajectory of rapid growth and success owes as much to the selective nature of U.S. immigration policy. Its origins lie in the post-1965 immigration of skilled professionals who first bought into the business. It grew as a result of the legitimate use of the family reunification law which permitted the early immigrants to sponsor less-educated relatives and employ them in the business. However, the labour of unauthorized immigrants and continued chain migration of family members have contributed most significantly to the profitability of the businesses, and enabled South Asians to continue to dominate the field.
The same individuals are vastly more productive in the US than in their home countries.10 This means that part of the difference in wages between what they would have earned at home and what they earn in the US can be pocketed by the employer. In any case, their total compensation includes getting to live in a First World country (with free public education) and having a path to citizenship, which is effectively a subsidy from American tax-payers to the employer, who doesn’t have to pay these costs.11 American small business owners are left at a disadvantage, since they do not typically have family in enormously poorer countries.
The third advantage non-linear ethnic niches have is the various racial privileges that non-whites enjoy in the US.12 The Cambodian donut shop empire began with affirmative action. And in addition to below-market credit from the ethnic network, non-whites are entitled to below-market loans from government programs designed to promote non-white business ownership and benefit from government contracts set aside solely for non-whites.
In fact, getting access to these racial privileges is what motivated the creation of the Asian-American US census category in 1980. Indian small businessmen lobbied the census bureau to group them with East Asians (who were at the time classified as Orientals) rather than whites to benefit from these programs. While racial privileges don’t explain the formation of niches (why concentrate in motels when these privileges13 apply so broadly?), they do help ethnic networks muscle out white competitors to begin with.
Once ethnic dominance is established, it is easy to sustain because co-ethnics have the enormous incumbent advantage of labor networking within the group. Employers finding workers and workers finding employers is challenging, and being able to focus the search on co-ethnics massively facilitates the process. And because there’s usually a language barrier between first-generation immigrants and Americans, it’s harder for non co-ethnics to work inside the niche and there’s less incentive for co-ethnics to defect from the cartel. This is psychologically self-reinforcing: the more dominant a group is within its niche, the less likely outsiders are to imagine themselves entering it and the more likely insiders are to imagine themselves staying put.
Winners and losers
The big winners of non-linear ethnic niches are the business owners themselves, who are broadly protected from competition outside of their small group, and secondarily other members of these groups, who have protected employers to fall back on if needed (as well as a protected source of visas into the US). In the short run, consumers benefit, because the lower costs from cheaper financing and labor get passed on. But in the long run, they are harmed because the lack of competition reduces innovation—businessmen protected within their ethnic niche can rest on their laurels.
The big losers are Americans at large. Not only do ethnic niches facilitate mass immigration, with all the problems that causes, but small business ownership (especially franchises) was one of the classic paths of upwards mobility for Americans. As ethnic networks take over more and more sectors, this gets closed off, leaving only14 the incredibly overcrowded path of college and a professional career. The historic American love of economic independence through ownership is dying.15
Turning back the clock
So nonlinear ethnic niches exist and are able to sustain themselves in the face of market competition. This might hurt some Americans, but so do a million other problems. Does it really matter?
Yes. Western civilization has been different for so long (more than 700 years) that we’ve forgotten what it looks like, but non-linear ethnic niches are a throwback to premodern forms of social organization—with all that that implies.
The collective brain
In The WEIRDest People in the World, Joseph Henrich argues that the “special sauce” of Western exceptionalism is free association and individualism. The most common form of human social organization throughout history has been kin-based. These social structures almost invariably extend beyond immediate relatives through fictive kinship, but nevertheless have upper limits on size. And they balkanize society into much smaller competing groups.
By breaking up kin-based structures into nuclear families, the Western European Marriage Pattern facilitated impersonal cooperation, which both enabled cooperation at much larger scales and greatly improved the efficiency of learning:
Gaius Baltar
Dec 21, 2024
If we want to learn about human behavior and attributes by observing people, we will always learn more by observing people with extreme attributes. Many years ago I had that opportunity. A woman I knew quite well gave me insights into certain aspects of psychology that I doubt I would ever have gained otherwise – and certainly not in school.
She had a very interesting combination of personality and mental traits. In fact, I’ve never met anyone else with these particular extremes. Naturally, I was somewhat fascinated by the contradictions she displayed.
Firstly, she was extremely intelligent. I know that for a fact because I saw the result of an IQ test she took. It was spectacularly high – at the ‘gifted’ level. Those results were backed up by her educational prowess. She was an extremely strong student.
Secondly, she had extreme ‘blind spots’ in her personality and perception. I eventually realized that the cause was an extremely low self-awareness, which extended from the psychological to the physical. She sometimes literally didn’t know where she was positioned in relation to things in her environment. Her psychological self-awareness was also spectacularly low. It was truly fascinating to observe someone with these extreme traits – to see how someone so intelligent could be so blind to her own behavior, beliefs and conclusions.
She was very interested in behavioral psychology and became a behaviorist – a devout disciple of B.F. Skinner. Behaviorism has certain flaws which are a result of a certain pattern of ‘dishonesty’ integrated into its structure. This was obvious to me and I assumed it would be obvious to her if I pointed it out. It turned out it wasn’t obvious to her at all. She got angry and dismissed the whole thing. I assumed this was a result of her being a behaviorist. Behaviorists, after all, take great pride in their inside-the-box thinking. But there were other examples.
Once during elections I told her that I was certain that political views were mostly inherited – i.e. genetically determined. I had given it some thought and I saw a very clear circumstantial pattern which seemed to indicate that. There was a structure in my mind with all kinds of facts connected to each other, with all kinds of possible causalities and probabilities attached to them. It was like a big regression analysis floating in my mind. It all seemed rather obvious to me and I expected her to see it as well – and I tried to explain it to her. She completely dismissed it and gave me the impression that she thought I was a total idiot. Now 25 years later, the genetic influence on political beliefs has become a ‘legitimate’ field of study called ‘genopolitics.’
There were many more similar cases and I started to notice a trend: She didn’t accept any conclusions based on patterns, or on any sort of complicated and unclear inductive reasoning. She only accepted conclusions based on linear logic (deductive reasoning) based on what she considered to be established facts. I also noticed that some assumptions (or presumptions if you will) she used as the basis for her logic were incomplete or dubious. She repeatedly just assumed ‘fact status’ of assumptions for logical analyses and didn’t investigate further. She often reacted negatively when I suggested that assumptions she was using might be dodgy, and once she had adopted a position she was almost incapable of re-examining it.
Assumptions (or axioms) are a big problem in logical analyses. If an assumption is wrong or incomplete, the result of the logical process will be wrong – even if the logical process is sound. The problem is that you usually can’t verify assumptions without exploring them using inductive reasoning. Deductive logic is nothing without inductive analysis, which is by its nature not a logical process. It’s a probabilistic ‘association’ process.
So I asked myself a question. Was she averse to inductive reasoning and the questioning of logical axioms because she had been programmed that way in school (she’s a behaviorist after all) or was she averse to it because she was incapable of these things? I started observing how she solved problems and tried to present her with all kinds of issues requiring inductive reasoning. My conclusion was that she was certainly capable of it up to a certain level, but there was a certain line her mind would never cross when it came to intuition and speculation. It was like her mind was carved in stone rather than being flexible and fertile. I slowly came to the conclusion that this part of intelligence was, to a significant degree, outside her ability. Coming to the conclusion that someone so intelligent could also be so intellectually deficient was one of the biggest mental leaps I’ve taken.
Through the years I’ve worked with a lot of smart people and I see this pattern everywhere. A good portion of well-educated and intelligent people seem almost unable to derive clear patterns from unclear information, and are frankly, mostly void of common sense. At the same time a good portion of poorly-educated not so intelligent people display considerable ability to see patterns and considerable common sense.
The duality of reason
The ‘duality of reason’ has been known for a long time. Back in the day intelligence, or reasoning ability in general, was described as two distinct processes: analysis and synthesis. Analysis is basically what we call deductive reasoning. It is the process of linear logic leading from an assumption or axiom. The process follows a number of very clear rules, usually in the form of if/then. The two key aspects of deductive reasoning are the rules, and the fact that it is linear or serial. One thing leads to another. It is similar to language in that respect. It is thought that logic, along with other serial tasks, is primarily processed by the left hemisphere of the brain.
Synthesis, or inductive reasoning, is about putting things together. A pattern basically emerges from chaos. The process is not linear or serial because a lot of things happen at the same time. It is more like a fuzzy statistical analysis, like multiple regression on steroids. The patterns that emerge are based on the strengths of associations and are not necessarily logical. They must therefore be evaluated consciously. A proper evaluation of these emerging patterns is probabilistic in nature. You can rarely be absolutely certain of the validity of a pattern or a theory that emerges in your mind. Parallel processes, including inductive reasoning, are thought to be primarily processed by the right hemisphere of the brain.
The duality of reason is not the main issue here. The main issue is that the two processes do not seem to be particularly strongly correlated. Some people seem to be good at logic but poor at inductive reasoning – while some people who are good at inductive reasoning are poor at logic. The former, however, seems to be much more common.
This dissociation between logic and inductive reasoning has extremely serious implications when it comes to evaluating people’s abilities and intelligence. IQ tests do not really measure the ability for inductive reasoning. A mental pattern doesn’t emerge when ordered to – it emerges in its own time and cannot be measured under standardized conditions. This means that the IQ measurement industry simply omits this part of intelligence – and the school system has followed its lead.
This dissociation between logic and inductive reasoning is being noticed by more and more people. Articles about the left versus right hemisphere of the brain and ‘intelligent idiots’ have been appearing with increased frequency. Some have even suggested that our current troubles have been caused by the takeover of the left hemisphere in western societies.
There is, however, an issue which hasn’t been properly discussed or understood. It is the following:
Sound logic depends on sound assumptions.
Assumptions can rarely be evaluated or validated without inductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is not a logical process.
Logic therefore depends on a process which is not logical.
For inductive reasoning to work, it must be consciously managed.
Inductive reasoning therefore requires self-aware thought.
Without self-aware though there is neither logic nor reason.
Let’s discuss this further.
Concept breakdown and intuition
The brain is arranged in evolutionary ‘layers.’ The oldest layers tend to be the lowest or innermost, while the rest represents evolutionary additions, culminating in the most recent layers of the neocortex. The brain also has several different ‘modes’ of thinking from the evolutionarily ‘basic’ to the advanced modes – all operating simultaneously. The most advanced mode we have is most likely inductive reasoning managed by self-aware thinking. What is this and how does it work?
The biggest evolutionary breakthrough in thinking involved the use of symbols. Instead of just using basic logical rules to interact with the environment, objects in the environment received internal representations. The use of these symbols/representations had one basic rule: similar things are the same. In other words, if something looks like something else, it will behave the same way, even if it’s not completely identical. This had massive consequences for cognition because it didn’t only cause external objects to have internal representations, but it expanded the representations into ‘inexactness.’ This inexactness expanded the ability to understand the environment and further introduced probability into the relationship with the environment.
The use of symbols became more and more advanced resulting in seriously advanced cognitive abilities. Symbols have now been broken down into components which are associated with each other in our brains based on activation and similarity. This means that new concepts can be created on the fly by combining ‘sub-concepts’ – or concept components/elements. The brain has become a concept-connection machine, working with concept elements; breaking them up and combining them as needed. This has created incredible fluidity and creativity in our cognitive processing, enabling us to modify or create new concepts on the fly. An example would be the concept of a ‘wing.’ Birds and planes have wings, and they are therefore related. They also relate to and demand the concept of flight. We also have things which fly but have no wings, such as drones and helicopters and silvery UFOs. This requires new concepts, which are subsequently created. Thinking using this ability can be referred to as ‘association thinking’ – and reasoning using this ability is referred to as ‘inductive reasoning.’
This mode of thinking is mostly subconscious and automatic, but it can be accessed and controlled to a significant degree as we shall see.
What must be understood about this ability is how much it contrasts with pure logic. The concepts exist regardless of whether they are real or not and they associate with each other regardless of whether the association is logical or not. This is necessary because you can only internally represent a complicated, vague and inexplicable world using similarly vague and inexact concepts. Crispy and clear logical rules or response sets do not work on their own in our complex world, and are an evolutionary dead-end on their own. Instead our minds have evolved toward more and more inexactness and more and more vagueness. Our mental powers come from connectivity and fluidity of clusters of concepts which create more and more complex ‘super-concepts’ and patterns. It’s obvious that this process will lead to an increasing number of false concepts and false concept connection-structures (ideas) if there is nothing to monitor and correct it.
You must, essentially, impose logic on your mental processes in an active fashion if you want to be a rational person. If you are unable to do that, you will basically be a puppet of your subconscious processes, which you will perceive as being (almost) external in nature.
Self-aware thinking
The process described above is both automatic and subconscious, unless we consciously interact with it. If we don’t interact with it, it will nonetheless work and create concepts and patterns. Those patterns will influence us, even without us understanding why. This phenomenon is usually called ‘intuition.’ We understand something without knowing why – simply because the process behind it has been under the threshold of our awareness. Yet, the process is more or less identical to the process we use during conscious inductive reasoning.
During conscious or self-aware inductive reasoning we essentially present a problem to our brain and wait to see what happens. Patterns will emerge and possible solutions will present themselves, often very vague. We then analyze what emerges actively and try to determine if it’s logical and fits the facts as we know them. Then we either reach a conclusion or start thinking about something else. While we think about something else, the brain will keep working on the problem, forming more patterns – which will either pop randomly into our awareness (or even dreams) or become clear the next time we actively analyze the issue. This is how inductive reasoning works and how intuition works. The whole process is essentially a ‘dance’ between an active and conscious logical analysis and mostly automatic pattern-forming processes which respond to our conscious analysis. This is where logic becomes reason.
This also involves us observing our own automatic thought processes – and interacting with them like they are separate from what we actually are. This ability is essentially what is referred to as consciousness or awareness. It goes without saying that this phenomenon is among the biggest mysteries we know of.
This process of interacting with our brain, or our memory, is massively affected by the processing capacity of our brain. Processing capacity can be defined as the ability to hold concepts active above the threshold of awareness (also known as short-term memory or working memory). A normal person can hold seven concepts in awareness at the same time. If this processing capacity is less, it will adversely affect the ability to interact with our memory and pattern-forming processes. If the processing ability is higher, it will enable much better interaction – and a more powerful mind in general. It can almost be said that consciousness, at least as it relates to inductive thinking, is not an on/off phenomenon, but differs between people to a degree.
Internal blindness
The ability to interact with the inductive pattern-forming process differs between people. The ability is probably normally distributed like other primary traits or abilities. This means that some people can form conscious positions on issues and examine their own conclusions and logic, while other people are less able to do this. The people less able to access their pattern-forming processes are more likely to operate on ‘autopilot’ when it comes to interacting with complex issues. They are more likely to accept ‘prepared logic’ and ‘engineered positions’ toward all issues – simply because their ability to examine them is lacking. I like to call this deficiency ‘internal blindness.’
While processing capacity without doubt affects the ability for inductive reasoning, there are clearly other factors involved. If a person has problems thinking ‘inductively,’ there are two possible reasons: A) The conscious interaction process is poor and/or B) the automatic inductive reasoning process itself is poor. The person either has low activity/ability in pattern forming or is unable to perceive the patterns and/or interact with them properly – or both.
A big hint as to what is going on is the phenomenon of ‘doublethink’ or the ‘ability’ to hold two contradictory views at the same time. A person may even argue for a particular position, and then soon after argue for a contradictory position without noticing the discrepancy. This is very common and seems to be, at best, mildly related to IQ. Smart people do this all the time, including in academia.
If things are working properly, there should be a ‘pattern response’ in your brain when you formulate or describe an idea. As you describe your idea or position, your brain should automatically and subconsciously explore this idea and everything related to it, including prior ideas. A pattern should form, and if it’s contrary to what you’re saying, a ‘warning’ should pop into your awareness. For a large part of people, this warning doesn’t come. It’s like there is a barrier between ‘consciousness’ and the activity of the pattern-forming process. This may possibly be some kind of communication problem between the left and right hemisphere of the brain, but there may be something else going on.
If a person with significant internal blindness is challenged with facts and logic, or ‘tricked’ into discrepancy and the discrepancy is pointed out to him, the response will often indicate discomfort. It’s like something has happened in his mind which is outright uncomfortable, like his mind has been hurt. The response is usually to alleviate this discomfort by denial or rationalization – and nothing will be learned. This may possibly indicate that the lack of ability to access the pattern-forming process is some kind of ‘avoidance behavior.’ Examining things ‘inside’ is uncomfortable, and is therefore avoided.
This is a somewhat weird suggestion, but it’s not without (circumstantial) evidence. Thinking is hard, but the most difficult thinking we encounter is when we try to break a mental barrier. Breaking a mental barrier is unique in the sense that it does not only require a lot of focus and determination, but it also results in significant discomfort. A good example is when a hypnotist hypnotizes you to forget something. He essentially places a barrier between the memories and your conscious access. If you can detect this barrier, you can break it and access the memories. Breaking the barrier is, however, very unpleasant. The barrier will elicit an almost phobic response, and you will be tempted to avoid it. If can even be said that the barrier is a phobic response to the memories.
How or why this happens is not clear. The phobic discomfort may suggest that the memories have been given an emotional element – that they have been connected to a strong emotional response from the emotional mechanism of the brain. It is interesting that people with poor ability to access their pattern-forming processes tend to be more emotional and more ruled by emotions than others. Perhaps every pattern their brains form automatically receives an emotional association, and will automatically create a mental barrier around itself. This would imply the automatic intervention of emotions into higher automatic processes which should work independently of emotions.
We usually perceive cognitive functions and emotions as two separate systems, which presumably they are. If a person is emotionally irrational, we usually blame the interventions of emotions at the time the irrationality takes place. If this ‘emotional barrier theory’ is correct, most patterns will automatically receive an emotional component in some people. Perhaps it happens during any conscious interaction with it, resulting in an emotional barrier, or perhaps it happens automatically on a subconscious level. That would be phenomenal indeed.
The Scientific Method was established as a way of determining objective truth in the natural sciences. Yet Republicans attack science routinely with no mention of any useful alternative.
So what is the "Republican version" of the Scientific Method? What is their proposal for determining objective truth that can withstand peer review?
post any interesting information on explosives and it's chemistry and any personal experience too the video shows 5 grams of mekp/nh4clo3
How is this even possible? How did we end up to be so insignificant?
EXCLUSIVE: Dr. Robert Malone Warns Of The Dangers Of Inoculating America's Chicken Population With mRNA Vaccines
>Feb 18, 2025
PLUS, The Inventor Of mRNA Technology Grades The Actions Of President Trump & Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In The First 29 Days Of The Administration
https://madmaxworld.tv/watch?id=67b513741fae93382fc14a8e
I know there is an interest in biohacking alternative testing methods around these parts so I figured I would make a thread for anyone who may want to do research at home.
What you will need to get started:
An incubator
A microscope
Growth media
Something to sterilize your growth media
Plates
Microscope slides and covers
Staining kits
Immersion oil
For the incubator you can buy one new on Amazon or used on ebay or you could even make your own. They are not difficult to build and there are plenty of resources online.
If you want to culture bacteria you are going to need a microscope with 1000x magnification power and for that you are going to need a 100x oil immersion lense. You need to buy it new and you need to treat it with care. The lenses scratch easily and must be cleaned with Kim wipes. If you are only going to be working with fungi then you only need to go up to a 400x lense.
For growth media you are going to want to use agar agar in most cases. You can find it as an vegetarian thickener in organic grocery stores or you can buy it on Amazon. If you aren't buying lab grade you will need to sterilize your media before using it. You can also use guar gum as an alternative to agar but it is not as firm as agar and may require additional thickeners like starch. Be warned that guar gum can be eaten by some microbes and starch can be eaten by many microbes so for more controlled expirements you should use agar.
To sterilize your media an autoclave works best, but those are expensive and a pressure cooker will work to sterilize your equipment in most cases and in a pinch you can even microwave, but don't expect the same results as an autoclave.
For your plates you can easily buy them on Amazon or you can use polypropylene containers from the grocery store. They have to be polypropylene because they need to survive the autoclave.
Slides and covers can be purchased on Amazon or cannibalized form a child's microscope kit at Walmart if you need them in a hurry.
Staining kits will most likely need to be purchased online. The only two staining reagents that can be found in stores are methylene blue (pharmacy) and malachite green (aquarium supply). For bacteria you will find gram stains, acid fast stains, and capsule stains will get you pretty far, but there are all kinds of staining techniques you can use in your projects.
It is best to buy immersion oil online, but anis oil, clove oil, and ceder wood oil will all work in a pinch. Be sure to clean you lense every time especially if you choose to use an over the counter alternative. You will ruin your lense if you don't clean it.
Resources
https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/MicrobeWiki
https://www.the-odin.com/
https://diybio.org/
Have fun expirementing and please don't do anything stupid.
>Variations of the DNST3 gene make Ashkenazi Jews 40 percent more likely to develop schizophrenia and similar diseases.
we need to come up with a virus that targets the DNST3 gene that makes the host die screaming shitting blood.
This thread is dedicated to 3D printing and other small-scale manufacturing processes such as CNC machines, miniature foundries, resin casting, and many others.
The major types of 3D printers available on the average Anon's budget include:
Fused Deposition Printers:
These printers print layer by layer using plastic filament (usually ABS, PETG, or PLA). If these plastics are reinforced with fibers (usually glass, carbon fibers, or wood) these prints can be quite strong. However there is an issue of accuracy with fused deposition printers because the plastics used tend to shrink as the cool so high precision parts are out of the question. Ender and Anet make great and affordable printers for beginners.
Resin printers:
Resin printers can print using a variety of resins that can have plastic, wax-like, or even rubbery characteristics. These printers are much more accurate than fused deposition printers and good for producing high precision parts or molds to produce high precision parts. They are a little more pricey than fused deposition but they are still very affordable.
Clay printers:
These can print using ceramic clays or even metal clay. These are best used for producing sturdy parts that do not need a high degree of accuracy as metal clay and ceramics will shrink in the kiln.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=USST4XM4ITc
A secret technique to improve the strength of your plastic prints is to electroplate your prints. You can just about double the strength of a 3d print by electroplating it.
If electroplating isn't enough you could always use the print as a mold for a stronger material such as resin or metal. The Devil's forge on Amazon is a great product for back yard casting.
If 3D printing isn't your style there are plenty of CNC machines that are very affordable that can machine plastic, wood, or even small aluminum parts.
Post your creations and advice here. I'm eager to see what this community will create.
Go learn something right fucking now!
Autodidactic education works. Reading a couple of good books on your own will give you a better education than any modern college course will, and it won't cost you infinity dollars to do so.
4/sci/ made a nice wiki full of textbook recommendations for various different topics in science and math.
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki//sci/_Wiki
Go get a recommendation, pull a PDF off your favorite shadow library, and start learning the secrets of the universe!
No idea why tranny jannies deleted the thread.
>New Glenn Maiden Flight
0600 Jan 13
>Starship Test Flight 7
2200 Jan 15
How closely related is nuclear energy applications tied to atomic weapons? Can any knowledgeable anons post actual unbiased scientific reports on the matter?
Although this is a /sci/ question, I debated posting this in /pol/, as untrustworthy states frequently accuse other countries of secretly developing atomic weapons alongside of nuclear power technology which I'm skeptical of. For example, Israel has sabotaged Iran's nuclear power programs many times over due to this accusation, but it makes perfect sense that Israel would sabotage Iran's core infrastructure and exports under such a lie assuming the technologies are not actually related at all. Can anyone disillusion me of my suspicions in this matter? I have a background in engineering and mathematics, in addition to reading articles from cutting edge journals outside of my fields of expertise, so I don't mind if any counter-arguments or material gets very technical.
Uranus is a beautiful sight. How big is it?