QuantumT

Why is there discrimination between the many worlds quantum interpretation and the simulation "hypothesis"? They are both conjectures, but it seems more valid to think, that there are many similar realities, than to think reality is simulated. Is it because one of them multiplies existentialism, while the other one diminishes it? And if so, it it not cowardice to discriminate between them? Just because we dislike one answer, does not make it less valid. But still people smile or chuckle at one, and not the other. Note: Yes I know these are the fringe interpretations, but they are also the most interesting and thorough. But this is a philosophical thread, so please indulge me

I know that some conjectures speculate in backwards time travel, but it violates the spacetime continuum, so I consider them a bit foolish. Forwards travel however, is very much possible. But neither of them has anything to do with the "many worlds quantum interpretation" that is equal to parallel universes. If we assumed that "many worlds" was a reality, they would all still share the same lineal timeline, so if you jumped backwards in time into a different universe, you would still violate the spacetime continuum. So in other words, a paradox would occur, no matter how you traveled backwards. So, if you ask me, time travel and parallel universes are not related in any way, besides that they are both very fictional currently.

Thus a conjecture. The density forms a singularity, yes, but "inside out" is not my understanding of events. I do not think that a white hole is needed either. Aren't those even more speculative than black holes? Thanks, but I've been to those sites, without finding clarification about the dimensional nature of "the bridge".

Do we even have any matriarchal data? As far as I know, today's western world is only 40-45% matriarchal, and the closest we've ever been to female dominans.

First of all, I know that a wormhole is a conjecture, so this thread is not about whether they exist or not. It is about how the conjecture/math is interpreted. When I imagine a wormhole I imagine two black holes, with gravity wells so deep, that they attract each other, and create a merged well. This merged well is invisible to the eye (and maybe also to measurement?), and when matter passes through, it becomes invisible while inside. If that description is correct (a big if!), does that not mean that the bridge/well is in a higher or lower dimension? It certainly behaves that way, in my opinion.

To win in the game of existing, you need to survive and make offspring. Your offspring needs to do the same. So it's quite simple. If you have a quirk, that makes you avoid early death, you succeed. Instincts are those quirks.

You might be right. I guess it's a matter of perspective, until we get a clear reply from research.

It must be the amount of effort we put into it. When we concentrate hard on something, it reflects in our mimic and body language.

There's nothing inevitable about life. The first living cell was a true miracle. A miracle that included two very complex ingredients and one amazing ability: RNA, the mitochondrion and the ability to split into two identical entities. It baffles me to just think about it. Many theists think this is a sign of divine intervention, but it really is just crazy crazy luck!

Yeah, it happens a lot among teenage females. If you think your girl baby is a handful, wait 12 years and you'll be in for a ride that will leave you bald, if you should not be so lucky to have a few grey hairs left.

Mules are infertile crossbreeds between horses and donkeys.

They don't cry. They scream. Closing your eyes partly or completely while screaming is normal for all humans, big and small.

Yes. LOL. No. The ass is a metaphor As for the subject of this thread, I have some inside perspectives on it, that I still remember clearly. When you're in a group of people, and have something to say, you need to have a firm, clear voice, and insist that it's your turn to speak. Depressed people don't have the will or means to exert that, so they quickly give up, and are not heard. When you're one on one, the conversation is almost always very personal and intimate. Questions about how one is and so on. A depressed person does not have the surplus to invent lies, so they just say it like they feel. For a normal, healthy person that is annoying to listen to. "Always the same negative BS!". But what one must understand, is that you asked the question yourself. You could have asked about something else. Something not personal. Something he/she does not need to lie about to sound normal.

I share an apartment with a girl. One day she came home earlier than usual, looked at me, and said "Take off my clothes". I hesitated, but she insisted "Take off my shoes". I took them off. "Take off my dress". I took it off. "Take off my stockings". I took them off. "Take off my bra". I took it off. "Now take off my panties". I felt super awkward, but slowly took them off. And then she said "Never wear my clothes again! Got it?!".

I just explained how it feels.

Wrong. It can be. Agree.

But you don't have farmland in cities, or where people climb or ski. You farm in the low lands that are flat and get the most water.

Hate to repeat myself, so I'll just link to my latest reply to that exact question:

I think greed does a pretty good job.

Grow where? Belgium will then be below sea level.

To be depressed is to have your head so far up you own ass, that you can't see nothing but shit, and feel nothing but pain.

A disadvantage would also be, that a common road rash could turn into lead poisoning, not to mention the catastrophic hole in your suit.

You need to make your case here, in writing on this site. Opening a thread with just links is a no go. Edit: Better (I think...)

Maybe this is not the right place. You clearly need and deserve help, but this is a place of science, facts and theories. May I suggest unexplained-mysteries.com. It's a place much more suited for emotions and psychological things. Just a thought.