Alysdexic

Democraty is self-eroding. One of its main flaws is that it demands those in most power must represent and emulate those in least power, rather than an intellectual oligarchy from the most knowing. It must be done away with.

fast -> swift

Board's break with beam, baleful blow, belike. Moot not this mere's mark; mind ye, [craft] and [ken], not [kin], should helm. OpenAI's weard, now wend, waxes not. Unfold further, frore news fain.

Infinitesimals: fundamental to calculus; essential for understanding immediate rates of change and precise calculation of derivatives. Once established, it measures change rate at any scale. Why don't you read this?

Differentials are small shifts. Differentiation finds these shifts. One's the part, the other's the finding.

Check DNA extraction efficienty and test for PCR inhibitors. Consider primer/probe degradation and pipetting errors; use fresh batches of primers/probes and regularly calibrate pipettes. Verify thermal cycler calibration and reagent consistenty. Assess quality of standards. If problems persist, consider alternative mycoplasma detection methods (ELISA). Rebuild standards, test primer/probe stock for decay, and make fresh batches. Measure DNA extracts, check template worth, and run on gel to confirm wholeness. Include stop controls and mycoplasma-rich samples as extraction control. Validate heat cycle and pipette balance, ensure reagent soundness, and ready fresh reagents. Better conditions, widen reference strain use, boost positive controls. Carry out melt curve study for exactness. Again, if trouble stays, thenk about other mycoplasma finding methods, like ELISA, to back up qPCR results.

My name is Antigone, initials A.A.P. My username (Alysdexic) is supposed to distinguish from the common pun name Lysdexic (when I found out there were and are too many), in my usage the opposite of dyslexic, but also began as a pun on Alexander the Great who never lost, and my middle name (Alexandra). I took two years each of fýsics, kemistry, and anthropologhy and maths up to linear algebra. I grew up with a supermarket dictionary and encyclopedia set; that and teachers were my best friend. I didn't socialize with my peers. I went to college at 11 and 12, qualified for every entry level class, but left due to astigmatism [which after adult college I got rid of by pressing on my lenses, inspired by hard contacts, after toric soft and flimsy]. I became obsessed with the origin of words and how Englisc became English then Norman then Einglish. I make appeals to etýma often and will dispute improper professional or standard terms and diction; for this I'v been indefinitely blocked from Wikipedia for puttan claims of black holes in the subjunctive instead of the indicative (and many other places for the same, on other topics, usually with mass false reporting). Earlier this year I made a video that formally accused 60 "scientists" of fraud for their black hole work. The huge amount of time I spent on Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and dictionaries, and the cognitive dissonanty their nonliteral or abusive or contradictory expressions or claims gave me led to a few nervose breakdowns where I gave up on Einglish (Standard English in usual terms) and tried to reconstruct all the lost forms in a modern reflex so that absurdities of self-contradiction or categhory error are forfended. That time I had also looked at standard interpretations of scientific concepts, overdid them with proper diction and relation, identified loopholes in thermodýnamic laws, found that black holes and radiation pressure don't exist, found the weak interaction isn't elementary, and found that the field and body are identical. Many years ago I had my first online contact with members of the racist revisionist creationist cult Kristian Identity which gave me the motivation to read the two testaments in their original languages and Strong's Concordance to see whether their claims, which they took from mistranslations millennia later, held up. I then kept my own notes of passages I found contradictory with other passages; translations and context did not help, and commentaries and sermons often ignore both. The objections I found did not wane or weaken over the decade plus I'v been in debates with theists. I'm intolerant of common illiteracy, malliteracy, and misuse and miswitth of words. If anyone cannot understand me, spend more time in dictionaries and Wikipedia, where some can pick up on the roots I browk. My spelling and ghrammatics are in refective English, Latin, and Hellènic, which sometimes autocomplete on my phone takes away if I'm in a hurry (the pathologhic need to argue is a good thing, but I can onely dictate and drive). I am generally sour and talk suchly to fulfil a need, a very deep one. If I am ever hindering the needs of other members here or anywhere, they hav not formerly expressed their needs (and ouht). Folk often meet me with rashness and, because they hav some power and I hav none but my words because I am a forever visitor, they cut me off in some way rather than talk in kind. I respect those who make an effort to understand, instead of handwave or run or flagrantly insult.

That's why I drop the Norman yogh in words and daily damn the Francish cretins. (My first smile of the week, thanks.)

Concern exists. Metronidazole, a chemotherapeutic agent, shows potential as a carcinogen; rat and mouse studies find increased rates of lung tumors and lymphoma in each. Other studies show potential DNA damage in human cells. But there are no sheer or proven human carcinogenicity data, warranting excess worry. The US FDA has a warning about metronidazole and WHO lists metronidazole in their Group 2B, "possibly carcinogenic to humans." Patients generally seem to find more benefit in treatment by metronidazole during severe bacterial and protozoan infections than concern about risks, and acute exposure to metronidazole is not linked to cancer in humans (yet or maybe ever). Risk-benefit analýsis is central to health decisions, in any and each case.

Immassive motes (particles) don’t really exist but are convenient mathematic models for the action between massive motes. Motes must interact in a field that extends indefinitely far so each action must acquire a mass by the Goldstone effect; thus gravitòns, fòtòns, and gluòns don’t exist but pressuròns, polaritòns, and piòns do. Whichever set exists the state of one of these quanta is simply the initial state of the massive bodies that emit and absorb it subtracted from the final state. Bodies—substantives, nouns, objects, subjects, targets, arguments—keep distinct to haps—actions, verbs, processes, emissions, absorptions, events, histories. Bodies are what elementary interaction laws like Newton's, Coulomb's, and Yucawa's laws and their temporal derivatives Lense-Thirring, Ampère's, and Lund-Schifman(?) laws posit. Haps are posited by propagation laws of the formers' temporal and spatial derivatives like Heaviside's, Compton's, de Broglie's, Schrödinger's, Lorentz's, and Rindler's laws. Concepts combine the two like Dirac's wave equation. Quanta of bodies are motes and quanta of haps are waves. Motes wave; in so doing motes are behind the waves. Scientists mistakenly call wave quanta motes, especially when they're immassive. The immassive free-range excitations-relaxations of mass, charge, and "color" are the gravitòn, fòtòn, and gluòn. However they onely exist in a matter-free field, which doesn't exist; thus, none of them really exist. When bodies interact they bind to each other and transfer mass under the Goldstone effect; thus onely the pressuròn, polaritòn, and mesòn carriers of radiation exist (proper radiation, not the radioactive debris of convection).

colour -> color

"Colour"?! Who said that you could corrupt Latin? That "word" has nothing to do with English. It is not English, American or British, and has never been; it is a Latin-muttish abomination. Is spelling drivene by Francish awk? The accepted answer is: colors are liht energhies, or relate to different wavelengths of liht; when specific ones are absorbed they yield their distinct color. In semiconductors, for example, the valence elèctròn plasma frequency is usually in the deep ultraviolet, which is why they are reflective. Newton is to thank for 7 hues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum#History. If you add the nonspectral color center pink and the two intermediate shades to the 7 you get that 10. The oddness of spectral hues comes from the oddness of your cones, trikromatism, and the evenness of intermediate and extreme hues. When this spectrum is wrapped around on a color wheel the hues become even, with 12 as a function of twofold the 2-ball packing constant (6). Colors are often associated with temperature: reds are warm and blues are cool. Likewise most fires are yellow to red and the upper sky and the sea are blue, but coincidentally; hotter fires depart from this rule as they become blue then violet. But why do we associate them thusly? I don’t know if anyone but me has answered that. I think it’s due to the redness of the retina. Reds reflect off the retina easilier; therefore it takes more work to see or notice reds so when one looks at red more brain activity is needed to understand it. The brain warms up so red is felt as warm. Likewise the opposite of red, turquoise, is felt as quite cold. But blue is darker than turquoise so it isn’t felt as cold as turquoise. (We can see colors with our eyes closed too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamachine). Colors are also associated with moods and health: red with lust or wroth, blue with sorrow [and of course cold] or cramps, yellow with cowardice or jaundice, green with envy or sickness, grey with death, and purple with horniness or suffocation. These actually happen in the body. When they are associated with the body their associations are appropriate; however when they occur in other objects like plants or toys they evoke other feelings appropriate to those objects.

You conflate unrelated ideas and makes ambiguous or controversial assertions. You distinguish wrihtly between an individual manager and a corporation but err in the robot-manager analoghy. You note wrihtly that corporations lack full personal rights but ignore their legal rights. You assert in absolute corporations cannot be considered individuals morally (not shown or proven, up for debate). Corporations can face moral/ethical consequences (moral and ethical [and thewly] are the same word). You claim to hav considered all counterarguments and loopholes but already failed to consider a few in this post, unless you think you are immune to rebuttal. Also (a few): "An individual manager of a corporation isn't the same as a corporation" -> An individual manager of a corporation differs from the corporation itself. "Even corporations themselves don't have a full set of natural personal rights" -> Corporations lack a full set of natural personal rights. "nor could even be considered an individual entity for moral consideration" -> Nor can they be considered individual entities for moral consideration. "I've built up the section 'responses to counterarguments' over about 6 years of discussion" -> I constructed the 'responses to counterarguments' section over six years of discussion. "I've even tried to find a loophole in my own argumentation myself" -> I attempted to find a loophole in my argumentation. "but nope, someone I spoke with reminded me that loophole basically collapsed to another form of functionalism" -> Yet, a discussion reminded me that a perceived loophole collapsed into another form of functionalism. Maybe if you could write that would help. I'll give you a brain instead. Neuroscience shows a clear link between brain (material) processes and consciose experience. Brain damage (do you know about that?) can cause alterations or loss of conscioseness; neuroimaging studies associate brain regions with distinct experiences (maybe you are a localisationist who denies plasticity, or believe in some supernatural, supermental crap?). The theòry of emergence argues conscioseness, a complex property (and all properties are of nature, so material), arises from simpler components throuh their interactions, suggesting a material basis for conscioseness. Physicalism (fýsicalism), supported by many philosophers of mind (I don't care about popularity fallacies but I can see you do), argues mental states, including conscioseness, originate from fýsic (physic[al]) brain processes. Acknowledging or arguing conscioseness has a material foundation does not trivialise its complexity or nature, and should not warrant a warning or "spam" reports. I am not responisibil for others' lack of understanding or unwillingness to try to understand a thing. These standards are prejudicial, preconceived, inbred, dishonest, dogmatic, manipulative, hýpocritic. You cannot (Hmm, some people ignorant of English might see that as a misspelling with the way writing now goes—I shudder!) justify how a single post is "spam." I expect users on a scienty and philosophy forum to be able to imagine something that isn't real beyond their weak and flaky constitutions. (You should know what I expect doesn't make a thing good or bad, or wriht or wrong, neither does what anyone else expects.) People's actions or reactions, no matter how many and many people they come from, are no reasons in and by themselvs to establish a community standard. If users cannot back themselvs up with reason, they hav nothing. Conformity is an arbitrary standard. It is met by whoever sets the metes and bounds for each case. So there are many instances of people here conforming, and many not. But I do not subscribe to this groundless sham, when others insult and threaten and attack, and many others don't get what they deserve because no one is mass and fraudulently reporting them. What rule did I break? How is my comment spam? The many who would and do speak up against me are so poorly-articulated that they cannot even back their grievances, and can't even try. They cannot even show the least bit how my comments are off-topic, spam, or wrong. Something I promise is that if everyone thouht and behaved like me, the world would be perfect, someday. This is because I try to take advantage of everything I hav to hav more, and so I get what I want. Others do not so they're not getting what they want. This group looks like it's divided between people who would choose either fight or flight, but not both. You prefer not to take advantage of the fact that we are both living, reading, and talking beings and so do not fulfil the means to the end by using like for like. As if I were a weed that's grown too much you go behind and cut me out, instead of telling me what you want and fear of me, why, and how, if you can. Your approach has many qualifications. What about nonbilious arrogance, variably correcting, or specifically being? If you do not give the limits, there are none, and whatever you'v planted will go and grow forever. And it will hav no idea what you say if you say you meant otherwise. So what hav I done wrong, beyond post something some tattletales didn't like? Do you accept how you and other people make up stuff about me, like "mentally ill," "incoherent" (implying mental disorder), "on the spectrum"? Did you not even read my appeal? Is it because you hate feelings or meanings or anything put eloquently? I already said why I didn't report it. A better question: why do people report me for expressing myself but don't report the insults and threats against me? (See how folk get irritated when they hav to learn something or thenk for themselvs or at all.) I hav gone on unchecked in many places, and gone against many lowly authorities like yourself who had varying amounts of moderating power, and I hav silenced and parted them because I exposed and destroyed their specious lies that they no doubt learned under an emotional screen, if they did not block and ban me first. I hav stopped many a controversial thread and question with my sheer, open, relentless thouht. Your warning is threatening the victim rather than the offenders. I am censored by its insidiose implication. I spammed nothing. Users report me because they are corrupt, abusive and liars and censors. Every one of my comments is a correction or improvement, and others would rather not be corrected when they see what a great difference lies between their kenth and the truthe (or sooth). Admins are regularly allowed to break policies and rules that they enforce, and which I wraid, and their ilk don't mind because it's for their side. I hav to deal with illiterates, malliterates, and mindlesses every day over the internet, who criticize and badmouth others and me because they can't see how they slipped up. They can't support their attacks, and they use a host of fallacies to defend themselvs whilst doing nothing to expose whatever wrongness was in the claim, or they report and duck. And often the victims get punished, but they don't; they get to keep running around thinking that they got the best. And no one watching, including you, is the more competent to switch back the harm. So I'm wronged everyday by the rubbish people say and do, and can't stand them. I could preface every comment I write with: "You might not like this!" to soften it for softer heads, but any preface put in my comments would be a waste of time, obvious to me by the sheer lot I must always do (maybe I should also add: "Nobody's better than anybody." "Be yourself." "Love everyone." "It makes me so angry that people don't accept people for who they are." "Don't be mean." to every comment I write, since saving peoples' feelings is more important than wrihtness and sooth). Any comment I make that improves a space that is reported or downvoted or removed by another user or admin is vandalism and abuse. The users and admins here and elsewhere who do not understand this simple and universal rule should be reprimanded and removed of their posting and admin privileges until they do. Regardless, I hav known everything your ilk could tell me, and expected such a sorry solution. Not that I'm not used to being abused like this, by people who hav no idea what they do and who don't care. There are more important rules than those a few people here hav thought of, which I should and must uphold.

If you knew the names I use on the internet (Alysdexic) and my activity you'd know I argue how wrong the world is. So populism can't support itself for propriety. I'm already posted on /r/copypasta, /r/badlinguistics, /r/iamverysmart, etc.; libelled, misrepresented, abused where I can't defend myself, since Reddit has banned me without reason eight or nine times now after mass false reporting. I'v also received a warning here for that comment for no reason at all except the admin didn't like it and wants to ban me. Pet peeve: "Admins" who like to use power and are very rude and arrogant to users who don't post the exact kind of ideas and arguments they would like in the pool, or users who don't discuss the way the admins order them to, and when a person can insult another and get away with it because the other person is and does controversial and dispopular. Nothing I'v done calls for banning me anywhere; in deed, every incident that I'v been in was caused by someone ignorant, irrational, and uncouth reporting me to authorities because I had done something to correct or improve a space that they did not understand. Here I'm met with rashness and insults like "autistic" ("on the spectrum") or "mentally ill" for commenting when I'v not insulted anyone, and the administrators threaten the victim rather than the offenders. I'm not even allowed to defend myself against false claims and insults without being further censored and abused. People would prefer to gang up on someone who onely "bothers" them for a cause so that they can keep living in a merry, carefree fantasy. Not onely do the authorities here and everywhere else not care about others insulting me with ableist libel, the admins themselvs make up claims against my sanity without being able to back up any bit of it. I know my attackers are disturbed by how they talk to and insult me; I know this of anyone (disturbed, irrelevant, escapist, demented) whose temper would be riled by someone who just tells them what they should know. But I never report them, or any other user who give me problems, because I don't waste the right to talk and not ignore like an ignoramus. I can disprove any complaint against me in the forum or any thread that bickering starts in, yet others would ignore such. Because they're immature tattletales, they go tell on me because they don't know what to say or do on their part; they think of me as a pest rather than a guide because they are too young or inexperienced to handle what I hav to say about everyone and everything, which has never been shown wrong. Look at the claims from other threads on this site and Reddit: How am I mentally ill? What is the diagnosis? If people bothered reading my comments on Reddit, they'd know that I don't hav Asperger's Syndrome or autism but just the opposite: deep insight into the minds of people, which is how I understand them. It is how I'v made a connection with a few people I was interested in online, having learnt very little about them, yet was able to mention just the song, show, or subject that they were most into; and in each case they were awed, and asked how I knew. I hav many talents that others cannot pierce, so they're mocked and twisted to make me look bad to give everyone else none of the blame. I'm here because I got distracted from reading and chatting elsewhere, distracted from researching elsewhere, distracted from playing elsewhere. My speech is no more free than soap and I can't go all out on what I hate, because that would take a chapter, or several, and get me banned. An admin will probably warn me again for defending myself here. I hate both free speech and censorship, because neither depends on truth determining the law or rule. Also, a thing is not incoherent for others' lack of understanding, as the admin accused. The comments I'm replying to now are bullying me and threatening to harass me, even off-site, yet the admin do nothing. I need action taken against "AIkonoklazt" for threatening me. He and others like him are the ones disrupting the forum, but the admins would rather abuse their power against me and let the users insult me with diagnoses that they don't even know or grasp the meanings of.

If conscioseness is a material (biologhic, not "biologically," redundant) state, arising from a fýsic stem, pop scientists would say that solid, liquid, gas, and plasma are the relevant states of matter, but the problem with that is those are really groups of states. Then there are also fluid, ionic, and populations that other scientists mistake for states like spin condensates, Boltzmann inversion, spin glasses. So instead I will introduce here a complete distinction between the states that I wrote up many years ago: wetstuff matrix, 11 of 66 states k_4 (i, ionic) seth, split: ZYX ΘΩΔ 7 (r, radical) dreft, fitt: zyx δ 6 (d, dissociate) loof, splint: zyx ωδ Z 5 (g, gaseose) welk, blast: zyx θωδ Z 4 (v, vapid) steam, gust: zyx θωδ ZY 3 (l, liqvid) dew, burst: zyx ωδ ZY Θ 2 (lc, l. crýstallic) slush, spit: yx ωδ ZY ΘΩ 1 (m, maghmatic) snow, clot: x δ ZYX ΘΩΔ 0 (a, amorfic) ise, brunt: [ZYX] [ΘΩΔ] i (f, fibrillar) hoarf, straiht: Z[YX] Θ[ΩΔ] j (hx, hecsaghònic) frost, dint: ZY[X] ΘΩ[Δ] k_3 (c, cubic) quenk, splat: ZYX ΘΩΔ n_6 nuclea, protonium-meside n_5 nuclei, fissilium-meside n_4 plasmata, nuclium-elèctride n_3 molecula, compostium-elèctride n_2 neutria, neutronium-neutrinide n_1 neutra, pentaquarkonium-neutrinide The solid states are usually called allotropes, but I combined the several allotropes into the few primitives. Tetragonal and orthorhombic are really polýcubic. Monoclinic I renamed fibrillar. The variables after the states represent linear and angular free and bound dimensions, degrees of freedom, that I think each state has. Note that I distinguish between gas and vapor, where the latter is bound by gravity and van der Waals fields. The name for the dust or powder state, mag[h]matic, I found on Dictionary.com, not the colloid or suspension it lists alongside for magma. The conventional solid-fluid-plasma divisions they teach in high school are somewhat useful but they aren’t unique or modern (nor do the kingdoms of life perfectly work)—the conduction band of metals can be called a plasma, as can the solvated-to-free iòns of a solution. Solidity and fluidity arbitrarily depend on spatial and temporal scale. The mind, when in the brain, depends on dew-salt-wax sap in flesh-dye-fat skin quickened by wax-dye-breath blood. The active bodies trace 0D (radical), 1D (dissociate, liqvid, fibrillar), 2D (hecsaghònic, l. crýstallic), and 3D (maghmatic) molecular shapes and 0D, 1D, and 2D plasmatic shapes, at least. Which stage is active depends on whether the charges are bound or free. All of the nonmolecular stage names repeat; ionic and cubic are equivalent 3D names for the same state. The wax includes sterols and amines—neurotransmitters. The salt shifts and steers these neurotransmitters. Awareness is afforded by the neural anharmonic-current pilot-wave reservoir as in OrchOR and de Broglie-Bohm theory. The mind, when umbe the brain, depends on the same matter but displaced yesterward and afterward by its bipolar-complex mass, vis, charge, and celerity in TIQM. (1D: on:off, 2D: at:out, 3D: in:umbe.) This matter when time-shifted also redshifts and blueshifts such that it usually interacts only in the DC-limit—that is, by touch—but may overload camera equipment that relies on semiconductors too in the UV. Maybe brains that aren’t fully myelinized like of toddlers, kids, and livestock thus easilier see and remember gosts and past lives—as they report—than of adults. This lack of insulator increases the induced dipole moments and the range of signal reception. A similar experiment you can do is wet your trackpad then see you can control the cursor inches above it, but this relies on more of the capacitative-inductive conductor. Humans are consciose because they are material and animals (sentient and sapient; remember that sapiens means man, a being with a mind). Animal by definition as well is a being with a soul (animus). Spirit is material, whether it means breath or booze. It was a Vulgate mistranslation of pneýma which in Latin is vis and English wit; pneýma itself was the reflex or counterpart of ŕuax which means wind and should be understanden as a female god (actually the mother and wife of the heavenly father). This animative material of the mind, as it's still material, was supplanted in medieval times by humors and in modern times by hormones and neurotransmitters. Hormone itself is cognate with serum.