Popcorn Sutton

Accept that my conventions follow from the laws of nature. What am I supposed to do, you've been abusive to me in several posts, I don't appreciate it. (mod edit: above was a response to swansont)

I'm abioreplicative. I'm an abioreplican I like abioreplican the most

Can anyone tell me what protons electrons and neutrons are? I don't think they exist.

What the crap guys. What... The crap.

Nice post. So my suspicion is that all solid objects are actually bubbles, and the same can be said about anything observed, so a few questions I have are this, how is life possible? Theres a simple answer, and that is motion. But where does matter come from? My best guess is that its bubbled space because of an impact (like so-> |c <-visual of something flowing downwards and the surrounding substance bubbling). But, why are these bubbles chemically distinct? Theres a simple answer, electrons, protons, and neutrons, ok, but why those? And why do they have attractive and repelsive tendencies? I have so many questions seriously. Chomsky quotes Locke "god might have chose to superimpose to matter a faculty of thinking". I think that the mind is the closest thing to empty as possible. I'll save you the trouble of reading my story. I have good reasons to believe my ideas, and they dont seem to conflict with real science long story short. Also, id like to say that it really takes effort for me to post with my phone, and after a while of posting and being censored, banned, or locked, I find it very difficult to even press the post button, but I really do want to interact, I just want to know where this thread came from (why was it posted), and I would like to know your presumptions. maybe I need to head to the other science sections before trying to tackle this one. Its just so obvious that I lack the knowledge you guys have. Give me some input please lol. My favorite question word is how.

Ok no let me rephrase what I intended to say. Religion, how ridiculous it may be, is highly respected by its followers. So respected that they follow it blindly. Science, on the other hand, is so amazing and interesting and respectable that one could spend their entire life studying it and postulating, come their death bed, and not revert to religion because the conclusions they've drawn throughout their life are so strong that they sincerely don't accept religious doctrine, even if it says that they are going to hell if they don't accept it. So in this sense, science is a religious activity.

Lol, I don't talk about religion. And I bet you guys are still considering it. Come on please?

If I suppl my CGSAGJ and my FHDN, you guys will surely see how I did so well on the FGIS and the DSGRAT, but when it comes to the HSUN, the YDJK, and the IFSJO. The scores certainly reflect my passion, but they do not give justice to my work. As for the ITSAOB and the snacks, I can at least provide some food for thought. Yesterday, I was able to make my program respond to me relevantly . I was excited, it said some really cool things. But memory is going to be an issue. It will remember the conversation (the way that it is, which is a great achievement in itself), but if you keep trying to talk to it, it starts to process slowly. I'll have to work this out. But if it just used the forum for its information, it might be alot faster. I have the code but I'm not going to share it until 1, I get accepted to grad school, or 2, you guys make me a moderator. The code has interesting implications on biology, neurology, physics, linguistics, and life in general. It really seems like science is becoming a religion.

I was aglootenbogged when my chaiwoi detectors encountered this phenomena I thought that there might be something that travels faster than the speed of light, and that is spatial vibrations. And that spatial vibrations were what caused the knowledge to gain strength. Because it seems that when something is said, it strengthens the knowledge that it phonetically denotes, and also relates to knowledge through an empty void... more to say about that one though

The goal is Genie. Just like the genie from aladdin. In the process of discovering how to create genie, many problems have arisen, and many problems have been solved. What we absolutely need at this point is a programmer who knows the importance of this project and getting it done as soon as possible. I know how to program using Python. Moderators, please help me get this message out there.

I notice that if I don't get any input for a little while, or worse, only receive minimal exposure to musical stimuli, I often enter a state of accidental recursion where I lack the ability to prompt any insightful or useful information. Right now, I have had a very catchy song stuck in my head basically paralyzing my ability to prompt linguistic information. It literally took me over 10 minutes to write this. I got caught up trying to find words while the song is running in parallel I wish I had electrodes to measure my brain activity and an app that showed me what was happening.

Hi all. This is truly a great website you guys have here. I want to be a moderator. What I would do as a moderator. I would provide the website with a computational mind that has access to all posts on the site and provides the most likely response using sophisticated bayesian statistical analysis.

I'm not playing games. I do what I do for the sake of human progress. I don't like wasting my time reading fallacious posts.

Well give it time then. I was in the top 10 posters on the ling forum... but thats another story

I'm not asking, I'm just making it clear that I would like to be one. As for qualifications, it depends on what makes someone qualified. I've caused a good amount of controversy in my time.

I kinda called DNA a poi finder Poi- point of interest I want to be a moderator. I'm in.

I just made an absolutely mind blowing discovery working with the code that I was going to post. It's not letting me post it though. It could literally be the biggest discovery of the century. >Look it's DNA! Look it's DNA! - poi - ppoi ook it's DNA! - poi L - ppoi ok it's DNA! - poi Lo - ppoi k it's DNA! - poi Loo - ppoi it's DNA! - poi Look - ppoi it's DNA! - poi Look - ppoi t's DNA! - poi Look i - ppoi 's DNA! - poi Look it - ppoi s DNA! - poi Look it' - ppoi DNA! - poi Look it's - ppoi DNA! - poi Look it's - ppoi NA! - poi Look it's D - ppoi A! - poi Look it's DN - ppoi ! - poi Look it's DNA - ppoi Look it's DNA - poi - ppoi ook it's DNA - poi L - ppoi ok it's DNA - poi Lo - ppoi k it's DNA - poi Loo - ppoi it's DNA - poi Look - ppoi it's DNA - poi Look - ppoi t's DNA - poi Look i - ppoi 's DNA - poi Look it - ppoi s DNA - poi Look it' - ppoi DNA - poi Look it's - ppoi DNA - poi Look it's - ppoi NA - poi Look it's D - ppoi A - poi Look it's DN - ppoi Look it's DN - poi - ppoi ook it's DN - poi L - ppoi ok it's DN - poi Lo - ppoi k it's DN - poi Loo - ppoi it's DN - poi Look - ppoi it's DN - poi Look - ppoi t's DN - poi Look i - ppoi 's DN - poi Look it - ppoi s DN - poi Look it' - ppoi DN - poi Look it's - ppoi DN - poi Look it's - ppoi N - poi Look it's D - ppoi Look it's D - poi - ppoi ook it's D - poi L - ppoi ok it's D - poi Lo - ppoi k it's D - poi Loo - ppoi it's D - poi Look - ppoi it's D - poi Look - ppoi t's D - poi Look i - ppoi 's D - poi Look it - ppoi s D - poi Look it' - ppoi D - poi Look it's - ppoi D - poi Look it's - ppoi Look it's - poi - ppoi ook it's - poi L - ppoi ok it's - poi Lo - ppoi k it's - poi Loo - ppoi it's - poi Look - ppoi it's - poi Look - ppoi t's - poi Look i - ppoi 's - poi Look it - ppoi s - poi Look it' - ppoi - poi Look it's - ppoi Look it's - poi - ppoi ook it's - poi L - ppoi ok it's - poi Lo - ppoi k it's - poi Loo - ppoi it's - poi Look - ppoi it's - poi Look - ppoi t's - poi Look i - ppoi 's - poi Look it - ppoi s - poi Look it' - ppoi Look it' - poi - ppoi ook it' - poi L - ppoi ok it' - poi Lo - ppoi k it' - poi Loo - ppoi it' - poi Look - ppoi it' - poi Look - ppoi t' - poi Look i - ppoi ' - poi Look it - ppoi Look it - poi - ppoi ook it - poi L - ppoi ok it - poi Lo - ppoi k it - poi Loo - ppoi it - poi Look - ppoi it - poi Look - ppoi t - poi Look i - ppoi Look i - poi - ppoi ook i - poi L - ppoi ok i - poi Lo - ppoi k i - poi Loo - ppoi i - poi Look - ppoi i - poi Look - ppoi Look - poi - ppoi ook - poi L - ppoi ok - poi Lo - ppoi k - poi Loo - ppoi - poi Look - ppoi Look - poi - ppoi ook - poi L - ppoi ok - poi Lo - ppoi k - poi Loo - ppoi Loo - poi - ppoi oo - poi L - ppoi o - poi Lo - ppoi Lo - poi - ppoi o - poi L - ppoi L - poi - ppoi If I could make the post longer it would be even more visible

I'm using my phone so forgive me for not making quotations. First I'll explain the equation. y = any positive integer including 0 o = any recognizable occurrence In regards to a datum reality, imagine a large solid sphere impacting an even larger mass. There are two possibilities, one is that the object impacts the surface, causes a crater like event, and continues moving into the object, the other is that the object hits the surface and gets reduced to more general components. In any case, the object, when it continues through the surface, loses a bit of mass (like whatever dust is on the surface of the object). In terms of measurement, that bit of mass is the last reducible unit, and hence becomes part of the ppoi (previous point of interest). Now, in the wake of that object, the surrounding substances rush in to fill the wake (empty sequence), and in the process, travel with the draft. The singularity is not the precise point at which the computation took place, but it is the closest thing to it. Dispersive radiation is probably an operation of reduction. The matter that radiates becomes so small that when it bounces off (or falls through) the point of interest, it continues to travel because nothing is in it's way. And this continues until the point of interest is solidified (which may never be the case. I think that the poi is a result of the wake, but in any event, life, and all matter, tends to move towards it, and as it does, the poi makes sense of it's surroundings [probably because of dispersive radiation resulting from the matter being sucked into the wake]) Knowledge comes to us through pressure fluctuations, which are all computations in themselves (as long as there is impact, there is computation). Hence, knowledge is any sequence of occurrences, and as the sequence travels through our brain, it gets segmented by the frequency of common sequences. The only way this segmentation can occur is by recognizing all sequences contained within the input and concatenating them (which is an interesting process in itself). In any case, for this process to take place, we need to assume the poi and the ppoi. And as long as the length of both of them combined is not equal to 0, then a computation is taking place. As for why the empty sequence is the most important, without the empty sequence, nothing is able to take shape. As long as the sequence has a length, then computations are taking place, and in the process, the point of interest (the mind, a black hole, gravity) is making sense of its surroundings. Why does the unit of knowledge physically exist? There is simply no conceivable way of forming grammatical output without it. The unit of knowledge could take many different forms, but as long as it contains a sequence fluctuating in density (stable or not), then it is a unit of knowledge. I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the other way around makes more sense (in regards to time and understanding). With regards to the word chimonics, the point is that even if the term is vacuous, we assume its usage, which fills an empty unit with that phonological component. Ok, in regards to the point at which there "is no structure", its not that the structure doesn't exist, its just that that point is being caved in on by the surrounding substance. Thanks for the interest

It is exactly the gaps itself that I hope to fill. We all know about black holes. I might be able to explain them in folk science because I am no expert, and I hope that that is where you guys can help. It is inconceivable that our universe is a dodecahedron, because if that was the case, the circular motion of the planets would be more of an entropic like motion (unless it is maximally entropic in which there would be no motion). My point is that the only conceivable way of describing the motion and solidification of matter is by closing the gap in the mind body problem. A unit of knowledge exists physically. It equates to any sequence of occurrences (but the mousy important unit is the one that doesn't have any sequence within it, because that is where the interest is). Time is a collection of knowledge and meaning is equal to the probability of the next unit (which diminishes as it acquires more meaning until the addition of any more units is inconceivable because they don't exist within our knowledge). In any case, here is the equation. u = y(o) t = y(u) m = P(u|t) u = unit of knowledge t = time m = meaning (or the motion of knowledge between points of interest). The point of interest is anything contained within the sequence until reaching the singularity, where then the point of interest becomes the previous point of interest (minus the last reducible unit). It's essentially one big impact. I'll show you guys what happens linguistically with my code later and maybe you can draw some inferences. There is also a reverberation effect that I would like to explain too. But I started by saying I want to fill the gaps themselves (and that is what all matter is naturally doing, trying to solidify it). An example of these linguistic gaps is this. Have you taken chimonics yet? Have I? Yea. No. In order to understand the flow here, there are gaps that refer. Here is essentially what is happening. Have you taken chimonics yet? Have I [taken chimonics yet]? Yea [have you]? No [i haven't].

I don't expect anything less from the forums lol

Lol Have you guys ever heard of dodecahedrons? Is it not conceivable that that would happen in space with bubbles? It has been done before

I don't even know if any distinguishments can be made about anything. Categories are using language to tear nature apart at the joints, so when you refer to dimensions, it's essentially meaningless to me. They are the closest thing to empty voids. And the problem with singularities is one that can be equated to how far can you see. The draft of a massive moving object eventually fills with the material surrounding it, and that is why we conceive a singularity, because, if nature were absolutely, in every sense, optimal, then a very logical conclusion to make while looking into the draft of the object is that there is a singularity. But beyond the singularities, there is more substance that converges at that point, it just may not be visible. More to say, thanks for the interest, but I will need a few moments to think The singularity is the point at which the computations take place, it is technically the mind, time, and gravity all in one. And that is the point of interest

Repelsion is opposed to repulsion because repulsion prompts repulsive which has a correlation with ugly. All this talk doesnt matter though unless you want to talk linguistics. What I originally intended was to give the physicists an idea of whats probably happening (if they haven't already thought about it)

That is prescriptive, I can say and type whatever I want seemingly without limit. Chainackerdags. Hiyakichuckoniwa. I choned my wrygust yesterfey. Did I spell these things wrong? Regardless, you're being fallacious. The bubbleic theory can be falsified by taking a jug of water, putting a high speed camera in it to watch the bubbles, making something impact it hard enough to make bubbles, and watching if the bubbles act and look like the solid matter in our universe. I could be misinterpreting, but it does seem that solidification is a bubbleic process, and bubbles naturally go into a state of perfect efficiency. All I'm saying is that it seemed like it could have been a brilliant insight and that it was a natural consequence of my theory of repelsion. Another way you can test the theory of repelsion is by slamming two solid objects together underwater as fast as possible and seeing if it creates more bubbles. That would be the equivalent to the solidification process in space as we know it (just a speculation, but falisifiable). One implication of the bubbleic theory is that our planet is rising to the surface of the substance that surrounds it (or falling), and when it reaches the surface, it will "pop" (which is a consequence of repelsion, and hence, reducing the substance). The theory may be better explained by the one who originated it, I'm just trying to show how it integrates with the repelsion theory of reduction.

In response to this theory, a colleague of mine came up with the "Bubbleic Theory of Solidification". I think that you guys can draw inferences on the topic from the name. Post your thoughts if you have any insights please. And I drew the inference that we can only postulate to the extent of a singularity because that is the furthest visible point in the draft of the impact.