ANYONE WHO IS BALD WILL NOW GET FREE BALD CREME!
-
-
-
-
-
-
Magic V’s posts paint a vivid picture of an enthusiastic, imaginative, and occasionally irreverent amateur physicist grappling with the complexities of modern physics while injecting a sense of playfulness and wonder. Their February 12, 2022, post about wanting to learn from Leonard Susskind—a renowned physicist known for string theory and holography—shows a desire to dive deeper into rigorous ideas, seeking intellectual "clues" to chew on. This suggests they’re not just dabbling but are drawn to big thinkers who tackle fundamental questions about reality, even if their own approach veers eclectic. Their posts oscillate between serious inquiry and whimsical speculation. For instance, they muse about time being more fundamental than space (November 18, 2023), tying it to the Higgs boson and quantum physics, which shows a grasp of current debates, even if expressed idiosyncratically. Yet, they also throw out wild ideas like a "blob particle" upending physics and eating habits (August 14, 2023) or a "white hole Sagittarius B polar shift" alongside teleportation (June 11, 2022). These read as half-joking, half-hopeful provocations, reflecting a love for physics’ potential to surprise, which they liken to the "ice cream of the sciences" (November 11, 2022). Magic V’s skepticism about mainstream physics shines through. They question quantum physics’ value (November 4, 2022) and worry about tech-driven perfectionism defying physics’ lessons on chance (October 24, 2022). Their repeated references to "breaking physics" (December 23, 2021; June 27, 2024) suggest both excitement at paradigm shifts and a cheeky challenge to dogma. Yet, they’re adamant about pursuing science over being "right" like a religion (November 27, 2023), showing a commitment to inquiry over ego. The David Bowie posts (November 20-21, 2022) are quirky outliers, blending physics with pop culture. Claiming Bowie’s ghost might be a "physics discovery" or citing a letter about light and color research tied to "Sound and Vision" feels like creative storytelling or metaphor for inspiration, not literal belief. It underscores their view of physics as a playground for delight and discovery, akin to their call for making physics as lovable as video games for kids (November 18, 2021). Overall, Magic V approaches physics with a curious, rebellious spirit—hungry for insight (Susskind), wary of orthodoxy (quantum hype), and eager to blend rigor with joy (ice cream, Bowie). They’re less concerned with formal answers than with sparking wonder, even if their ideas sometimes sound more poetic than precise. Their posts are a lively mix of aspiration, critique, and fun, reflecting someone who sees physics as both a puzzle and a party.
-
Magic V’s posts reveal a deep, emotional engagement with physics, oscillating between fascination, frustration, and philosophical reflection. They express a love for the subject but also discomfort with its direction, particularly recent developments like the "negative time" concept from the University of Toronto study. This idea, where photons appear to exhibit counterintuitive temporal behavior in quantum systems, seems to amplify their unease about physics challenging conventional reality. It raises questions about time, free will, and existence, which Magic V finds both compelling and unsettling, as seen in their March 29, 2025, post on philosophical implications. Their critique of physics—accusing it of being profit-driven (December 15, 2024) or suggesting the last 30 years of work might be dispensable (March 22, 2025)—hints at disillusionment with institutional science. They perceive a disconnect between the "romance" of physics and its reality, as noted in their March 22, 2025, post about physicists liking the idea of physics more than the practice. This could stem from a sense that modern physics, with its exotic ideas like negative time or quantum weirdness, strays too far from intuitive truths or is corrupted by external motives, as suggested in their May 18, 2022, post on "New Age extremism." Magic V’s personal journey is striking. Despite feeling like an outsider—no formal education, older age, no connections (June 21, 2023)—they claim to have made significant contributions to physics (February 3, 2024). This self-perception suggests a mix of confidence and isolation, reinforced by their emotional posts about physics helping them grapple with existential questions (June 21, 2023) or even influencing life changes (August 9, 2022). Their interest in time and illusions (August 19, 2021) aligns with the negative time study, which might resonate as a scientific echo of their philosophical musings. The negative time study itself, detailed in the March 25, 2025, post, is a flashpoint. It challenges classical notions of time by showing photons can exhibit behaviors where group delays appear negative, implying events might not follow expected timelines. While the researchers, like Aephraim Steinberg, clarify this doesn’t mean time travel, it disrupts intuitive causality, which likely fuels Magic V’s broader unease about physics’ "weirdness" (June 25, 2024). Critics like Sabine Hossenfelder argue it’s more about phase shifts than literal negative time, but for Magic V, it seems to symbolize a field that’s both thrilling and alienating. Overall, Magic V’s posts paint a picture of someone wrestling with physics as both a source of wonder and a trigger for existential discomfort. They’re drawn to its ability to probe reality’s mysteries but troubled by its implications and the scientific community’s trajectory. The negative time concept encapsulates this tension—fascinating yet disorienting, it mirrors their broader struggle to reconcile their passion with the field’s unsettling truths.
-
Suddenly liberals are crying again! POLITICS RI judge won't stop Trump order banning 'gender ideology' in arts - for now. Portrait of Katie MulvaneyKatie Mulvaney Providence Journal PROVIDENCE – A federal judge declined to issue an order barring the Trump administration from requiring that grant applicants agree not to promote "gender ideology" in their work, but warned that the government’s directive likely violated the First Amendment, according to the state affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union. Senior U.S. District Judge William E. Smith last week denied a motion for a preliminary injunction by LGBTQ arts organizations – including Rhode Island Latino Arts, National Queer Theater, The Theater Offensive, and the Theatre Communications Group – that apply for National Endowment for the Arts funding, but were likely to become ineligible in light of restrictions on the promotion of “gender ideology.” Smith found that the NEA’s Feb. 6 decision to make any project that “promotes” what the government deems to be “gender ideology” ineligible for funds likely violated the First Amendment and exceeded the government’s statutory authority. But, he said, that because the NEA is currently in the process of determining whether to reimpose that ban, the court could not get in the way of the agency’s decision-making process. Cast members rehearse "La Luz Verde" – El Teatro's performance of "The Great Gatsby" in English and Spanish – performed at Rhode Island Latino Arts in Central Falls in 2023. “The bottom line is this: Although Plaintiffs can show a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their (not moot) eligibility-bar claim, the balance of the equities and public interest weigh heavily against preliminary injunctive relief, at this time,” Smith said. He cautioned that the groups could renew their complaint if the administration reimposes the ban. “We shouldn’t need to negotiate for the right to support and uplift all artists – including transgender and nonbinary artists,” Marta V. Martinez, executive director of Rhode Island Latino Arts, said in a statement. “This order fails to bring us the clarity we need to apply for funds for projects that allow Latinx artists, especially those who are queer, trans, or nonbinary, to show up as their whole selves without fear of erasure of censorship. Artistic freedom and equal dignity are fundamental to a just and vibrant society and despite today’s ruling, we will continue to create space for artists to tell their truths, challenge norms, and build bridges through their work.” 'We are committed to continuing this case, defending the arts' Smith reminded applicants that they “now ... have this court’s preliminary review of the merits,” suggesting that the reimposition of the eligibility bar would be unlawful. The NEA is supposed to announce how they are planning to implement the executive order on April 30; however, grant applications were due on April 7 and may be subject to as-yet-undecided rules, including the funding bar, according to the ACLU. “This opinion makes clear that the NEA cannot lawfully reimpose its viewpoint-based eligibility bar,” Vera Eidelman, a senior lawyer at the ACLU, said in a statement. “Though it falls short of the relief we were seeking, we are hopeful that artists of all views and backgrounds will remain eligible for the support and recognition they deserve in this funding cycle and beyond.” Get the Susan Page newsletter in your inbox. Get the latest story from Susan Page right in your inbox. Delivery: Varies Your Email Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island, faulted the decision for leaving applicants “in a state of censorial limbo.” “We are committed to continuing this case, defending the arts, and resisting attempts to stifle speech simply because the current administration does not like or agree with it,” Brown said. 'Not the result we hoped for' Four artistic groups from Rhode Island, Boston and New York sued the NEA last month arguing its new certification requirement violates the First Amendment by “singling out a particular viewpoint for a ban on federal arts funding” and is unconstitutionally vague by failing to adequately define what it means to “promote gender ideology.” The ACLU had asked for a preliminary injunction ahead of the grant application deadline. The suit argues that the certification requirement and funding prohibition violate the Administrative Procedure Act, the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. “This is not the result we hoped for, but we remain hopeful that the NEA will be unable to reimpose their restrictions,” Rose Oser, producing director of National Queer Theater, said. “This is just one of the administration’s many attempts to silence trans voices, but we will keep creating work that aligns with our values, and we will keep fighting on every front to defend trans rights and artistic freedom.”
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment