wolframhydroxide
@wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 8 hours ago:
You find yourself suddenly 3 meters up in the air, which is sufficient to change your personal gravitational acceleration by 0.00001 m/s^2. As you can imagine, it is not fun to fall 3 meters. You do anyway.
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 9 hours ago:
That is, canonically, almost exactly what Saruman’s robes are supposed to look like:
“I looked then and saw that his robes, which had seemed white, were not so, but were woven of all colours…” - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 1 day ago:
Yes, unlimited access to universal truth, with error reporting.
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 1 day ago:
Fair. I would argue that “many people going insane” would be covered under the sacrifice clause, but hey, this seems like the best of all possible outcomes from mucking about with reality.
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 1 day ago:
One of the best shows in the history of television.
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 1 day ago:
I’d like to be granted the ability to, at any time and without limitation on scope, number, or length, ask the universe questions (asked in the dialect of modern english in which I am fluent) and know the answers, but with the following stipulations:
- that all answers are to be formatted and delivered in such a way that I understand them, without any changes or consequences that my current self (as of the writing of this statement, in my current condition) would consider a significant change to my physical and mental stability, and without requiring more than 3600 metric seconds (relative to my worldline) to understand in fullness, and being delivered in a timeframe of less than 3600 metric seconds (relative to my worldline).
- that any redactions due to such stability concerns as in the prior stipulations are to be formatted and delivered as part of the reformatted answer
- that any answer which is inherently unknowable returns an explanation for why it is unknowable, formatted as an answer pursuant to the prior stipulations
- that no answers pursuant to the ability lead to circular logic
- that this ability, its answers and enabling factors shall not require a sacrifice which my current self (as described above under my current circumstances when informed of the context of the sacrifice in plain English communication) would not think reasonable.
- that if such a sacrifice is required, an explanation of the requisite sacrifice and the factors requiring it be returned to me, formatted as an answer pursuant to the prior stipulations
- that I am to be able to choose to transfer any of these answers to another individual of any species, and that the individual be able to understand the answers, so long as the prior stipulations on sacrifice and physical and mental stability are satisfied both for myself and the secondary individual.
- Comment on Everybody gets one [choose wisely] 1 day ago:
Is that still from Life After People?
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 day ago:
I think I’d take bizarro world where chirality is wrong over the timeline I’m in, where the president of the united states is a rotting fascist mango and the world has at most 100 years before human civilaization can no longer exist.
- Comment on oof 2 days ago:
Some of those who teach do so because they actually enjoy it, find meaning in it. Wretched though we may be, some of us believe that knowledge has inherent value without application. A pity you’re so closed-minded that you reject the very idea of it. I have met more compassionate and caring people in the teaching profession (before I ever chose that as a field) than in any other part of life. It’s pitifully ironic to come into a community of science and disparage education. How sad.
- Comment on sardonic soup 5 days ago:
If you’re really looking to spit in the eyes of Death:
Mince some destroying angel and deadly webcap into a nice mushroom ranch, sliver some bitter almonds and untreated cashew nuts over a nice hemlock cress with some of the shaved hemlock roots mixed in with some thinly sliced manchineel apple and add in some belladonna berries on the top for additional sweetness. From what I understand, all of those actually taste pretty decent, so without the deadly poisons this’d be a bomb salad.
- Comment on Orb 1 week ago:
My hypothesis would be that, in order to keep that membrane taut, the internal salinity would have to be fairly close to the exterior salinity, otherwise it would shrink due to hypertonicity. That cytoplasm will probably just taste like slimy seawater
- Comment on Panama Proxima 1 week ago:
As it is written in the ancient texts.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
These ages were created by NASA, though you can make your own by taking two pictures about 4-5 inches apart. Try going to the Parallel View community to see more
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Yeah, try the wall-eyed version I posted as a top-level comment
- Comment on Can I lick it? 1 week ago:
Just like how lithium should be red.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
I also personally prefer wall-eyed viewing, but these just happened to be cross-eyed originally, so I was surprised by the complaints.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Actually, I made a version for wall-eyed viewing in one of the other top-level comments.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Very strange, because I can move from this image of PCl5 directly to the honolulu image in the OP and it works just fine. Meanwhile, if I move from there to the “are you not entertained” image, it makes the images go into the page, since they’re wall-eyed images.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
I’m glad it helped!
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Yes, I made the second set. I have been looking at the originals since I found them months ago. Here, let’s do a test. jmol generated this image as “cross-eyed”. Do you agree?
Image - Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Define “Cross-eyed”. I get the impression that your definition is not the same as mine. Cross-eyed viewing is specifically shifting your eyes so that they would be focused on an object closer to you than your screen. Wall-eyed viewing is the term used for shifting your eyes so they would be focused on an object behind your screen. The originals above, as the text in the original NASA photos says, require you to cross your eyes. The images I have posted in this top-level comment require you to look through the screen at the wall. I don’t know what else to tell you. You’re just wrong. I’ve been doing this for fifteen years. The US Government has been doing it since the second world war. I think that, given that the current administration is made up entirely of cross-eyed imbeciles, we can probably take their word for it that something is cross-eyed?
But, since just telling you to read the things I have already posted didn’t work last time, take a look at the difference between the CrossView and Parallel Viewing (wall-eyed) communities here on Lemmy. If you still don’t believe me, I cannot help you.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
I promise this isn’t a troll. In your case, it may be that your eyes are having difficulty focusing on nonexistent objects. If they’re blurry, it’s not that your eyes aren’t crossing, but rather that they are out-of-focus. Eyes naturally focus the lenses to bring near or distant objects into clarity, but when I was first doing magic eye images a long time ago, it also took me a while to convince my eyes that they needed to focus on the images.
My guess is that, since the actual images are on the screen at distance A, but your eyes are crossing as if they’re looking at distance B, your eyes are auto-focusing for objects at B, but the images are still actually at A, so they appear out-of-focus.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
I assure you, given that I made this image, that these are Wall-eyed, and the originals above are cross-eyed.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
I did end up posting the wall-eyed version of some of them in a top-level comment.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Did you try the wall-eyed versions below? Those should be smaller on a mobile screen, and many people (myself included) find wall-eyed versions easier.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Since some people are apparently very salty about these being cross-eyed, despite the fact that that’s just how NASA made them, here, special for y’all, a selection: Image
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Hmm, I mean, it works fine for me, but I’ve been viewing stereo images for 15 years, both wall- and cross-eyed, so YMMV. I’ll see if I can quickly edit together some wall-eyed versions of the images for y’all.
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
Amazing! Thanks!
- Comment on Since we're doing magic eyes now... 1 week ago:
You’re doing “wall eyed” viewing. These are for “cross-eyed” viewing. “Wall-eyed” means your eyes are focusing at a point behind the image. You need to cross your eyes for these. Try putting your finger in between your screen and your eyes, varying the distance until the dots merge. Then, remove your finger, focusing on the image itself. That should allow for cross-eyed viewing.
