I’m not going to complicate the basic story with caveats. That’s the basic plot.
Either there is freedom to leave based on new ideas, like GU, or the Einsteinian restrictions will persist.
If they persist; we probably can mildly elongate survival here by decades via wisdom.
But if we can leave to explore the universe by going beyond Einstein, anyone else out there can visit.
This brings us to UFO/UAP. Assuming a distribution of life in the cosmos:: some life is behind us in science, with others ahead.
A (loose) argument then links UAP to survival:
If life is abundant & we’re not the top of the hierarchy (which is reasonable to me), I’d guess that UAP would be here if that is possible in Einstein’s successor theories. The absence of UAP is strong but *inconclusive* proof that Einstein’s restrictions persist in all theory.
Hence my interest in UAP. UAP from distant worlds would be a strong indication that it is possible to diversify our shared risk which is that all known technological life is dependent on one atmosphere linking our three main existential risks:
A) Climate
B) Pathogen
C) Radiation
So if #ufotwitter ever wanted to know why I didn’t take #UFO seriously, it was because I thought it was *preposterous* given lack of evidence.
And if #ScienceTwitter wants to know why I spun on a dime, it’s because it IS linked to the post-Einsteinian physics of our survival.
🙏
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hero MD: “What is it about people who rely on paychecks to feed themselves and often their families, that could possibly account for a mind destroying brain virus? Does the virus infect the paystubs as its vector?? That can’t be it. Gotta think….”
Then the hero would be fired.
This would result in a second epiphany. “OMG!! I’m free to speak my mind as long as I walk away from my medical credential, my societal respectability as determined by institutions, and the 10s of 1000s of hours & hundreds of 1000s of dollars I invested in becoming a doctor!”
One overarching reaction. The speech was 1/3 of a speech. There are three groups threatening US Democracy. No one can give the needed speech until they all out all three groups:
A) Extractocrats
B) Wokestanis
C) MAGAstanis
All these groups are reacting to each other. MAGASTAN is trying to defend the US from Wokestani insanity and the Extractocrat Swamp and will forgive their leader almost any bad action because he seems to be the only thing out of central control powerful enough to disrupt DC.
Wokestanis by contrast are trying to defend the US from some vision of Charlottesville madness energized by Trump metastatizing into a mainstream nightmare.
Mainstream Extractocrats try to protect the Swamp from the other party's "armed wing" while trying to operate their own.
Let me say it starkly: Anti-Racism is designed to perfectly undo all our imperfect progress towards loving each other. This serves the perverse economic incentives of a tiny few.
Read this poll. This is likely not a subtle effect. [My answer was B).]
It is time to face the unthinkable fact: some group switched the labels on the “Poison” and “Antidote” jars around 2012. MLK isn’t racist. “Anti-Racists” are RACISTS. We have been mainlining pure RACISM for a decade.
According to physics, you’re a wave. A conscious wave.
As a conscious wave, you were curious as a child. The most natural question for a conscious wave is probably “If I’m but a conscious wave, in what medium am I an excitation?”
Yet most waves never ask this question.
Why?
🙏
The short answer is “You appear to be a wave in a structure called a Fiber Bundle.” of which many have never heard.
I talk about Fiber Bundles a lot because they appear to underlie all of existence, and am thus very confused by physicists who don’t discuss them. It’s so odd.
For years this has been the leading image of a fiber bundle on Google Image search. This I take as proof that the human race is slightly insane: Our leading image of the underlying medium of existence itself looks to me like a bandaid/plaster that has been ripped off a hairy arm.
I used to talk to folks at @cnn, @npr, @washingtonpost etc all the time on inflation, physics, immigration, science policy, etc. Then, mysteriously reporters slowly started complaining about the situation at work much more. It seemed like we went from news with spin to narrative.
Narrative driven news was the @nytimes special brand. On the one hand it *was* written with lively prose. On the other hand, I hated the idea that the narrative arc was constructed to fit facts that sometimes hadn’t even happened yet.
As many inferred, I wasn’t happy about “Dark Horse” making dismissive internet-level commentary about “Making Sense” having “TDS”. I was further unhappy about the response of “Making Sense” podcast casting aspersions in return.
But I don’t owe the internet what’s privately said.
As for “family first”, that’s my general rule. I’m backward like that. Throw me in “progressive jail” for having a hierarchy of loyalty.
But whether family or close friends, I expect the same loyalty & civility in return. I mostly live off line and advise others to do likewise.
Interpersonal drama is destroying our world because it turns all conversation into an internet version of Reality TV, but with real people. And I wish folks would stop building audience around interpersonal drama between folks.
It’s so destructive compared to ideas or real work.