I dunno about that. There's lots of scientific evidence for quantum mechanics. It was disagreement between experimental results and theory which lead to the development of quantum mechanics in the first place. There have definitely been repeatable experiments demonstrating quantum entanglement, for instance.

String Theory, now, that's where you've got your unprovable assumptions. Whereas quantum mechanics at least has a big "we don't know why this is" hole in the middle, the string theory guys would just posit the existence of a bunch more dimensions to make the equations work.

Not that I actually understand the mathematics of any of it, mind you.

I recall something similar, low power medium heat mini-reactors that could not meltdown, on a tv science show a decade or more ago. They had a few small units (shipping container size) running a few buildings somewhere in Canada on an experimental basis, but I have no idea what came of the project.

Actually, matter does appear and disappear from and to nothing. There are energy fields that permeate space, and when their potential gets too high, they collapse and eject a particle. Similarly, particles can be destroyed or decay and upon that event they cause a spike in the background energy fields.

One of the essential functions of a collier is to compress a bunch of crap into a tiny spot, so that when enough decays in that specific spot it will cause such a local spike in energy that new particles must subsequently be ejected (particles that are produced at some calculated energy level - different energy levels producing different ejections).

*This is at the subatomic level. Large collections of matter don't just convert to energy.

I know plenty of people roll eyes at that, but the math upon which those machines are built are using the same math that makes things like modern lithography machines work (they manipulate tiny patterns of molecules). You basically prove the math every time you use a cell phone (thing with modern micro chips).

...

But that's beside the point. If there ever was 'nothing', the question isn't "whether or not god exists to have made things" - it's "why do things exist". God could be an answer. As could infinite other possibilities.

...

Personally, eternity is the answer I assume is most likely to be correct. Because you don't have to prove anything. The universe need not be static - but if something was always there (even just energy fields), then there is an eternity in one form or anther.

Background energy and quantum tunneling are a neat concept (referring to metastability). Because you can have a big-bang like event if the background energy level tunnels to a lower state, expanding a new space starting at that point, re-writing the laws of physics in its area of existence. Meaning that our universe as we know it can simply be one of many bubbles of expanding tunneling events - created at the time of the event, and due to be overwritten by another at some point. Essentially a non-permanent local what-we-percieve-as-a-universe, among many. (I'm avoiding the concept that time and space are relative to each bubble, and there is no concept of an overarching time and place outside of any one event).

(All this comes from taking formulas that model measurements of reality, globing them into larger models, and then exploring the limits of those models at extreme values/limits. ... with a much lagging experimental base slowly proving and disproving elements of the model (and forcing model refinement upon a disproval, so that the model encompasses the new test data))

-scheherazade

The hands on the hips at 3:23 is just---priceless.
And--what airplane type is this? and (leading question) --is this a homebuilt experimental?

I just read it.

I get that it's a complicated issue and emotive for many, I've been on the receiving end of abuse myself and I do understand what being "triggered" feels like (not that I think it should change anything outside of a personal context). I also understand that a subject such as this kind of requires some nuance and intelligence if it's going to be tackled comically, without coming across as simply crass.

But, finding some material crass seems like a necessarily consequence of experimentation and having a diverse artistic community. And moreover, Jim's material here didn't come across as crass, or intentionally hurtful to me. (beyond a deliberate faux crassness clearly intended to emphasise the effect of the material)

I can only assume that it cut too close to the bone for your own sensibilities and/or experiences? Or perhaps instead that you are concerned that it might in some way encourage or validate the twisted attitudes of unevolved brutes?

I understand and respect this, but I have always seen such things as my own weaknesses and obstacles to be overcome. By way of example; to me death and cruelty are the ultimate comedic premises. They represent the deepest fears and anxieties inherent in the human condition, and as such conduits to the deepest catharsis.

Life is unfathomably cruel and brief; to find true levity in the darkest reaches of that, I think represents one of the highest and most liberating state a human being can strive for. (the temporary suspension of ego and care)

We all die and awful things can happen at any moment, this for me is the divine joke and I suspect the underlying power of all things we find humorous to a greater and lesser extent. (one could re frame that as "life is pointless and as such hilarious", but it would mean the same here)

I guess after all that self indulgent waffling, I'm saying that I don't think the collateral of other peoples sensibilities should hold back the pursuit of such lofty things. I'm sure Jim wouldn't see it in quite such terms, but in his own small way this is what I think he, like all good artists, is doing.

There will always be Devils and Ignavi but would be Ubermenschen (or if you will Uberdamen) should never pander to such creatures, lest they allow them to pollute the light they seek to create.

Nothing is true, everything is permitted.
Love is the law, love, under the temperance of will.

(That last part is just a lunatics way of saying; never let the fear of the foolish compromise the pursuit of ones highest arts. Life is short, shine brightly and apologise only on your own terms.)

(^ I do unfortunately suck at actually living by the above, because I'm lazy and cowardly)

Apologies for the gender mixup, I'll make a mental note for future reference

Much love.

Part of Cap's WW2 force, and friend from childhood. Last seen as "The Winter Soldier", a memory-wiped, experimental super soldier created by Hydra.

Dogma vs experimentation.

Last I heard, they intend to create their first experimental plasma towards the end of this year, once they pass the final inspections and receive their operating permit.

By the way, the project is 100% publicly financed and run by a non-profit association of German research institutes.

You may not have words, but the youtube link has PLU-ENTY:

www.snuffpuppets.com

Everybody’s born

Everybody cries

Everybody shits

Everybody dies

Conceived in 2012, Everybody is a giant 26.5m human puppet with articulated, detachable and interactive body parts and organs. Ambitious in scope and subject, it is the largest human puppet on the planet and represents the essential humanness of everybody.

Everybody‘s build is experimental; it’s kind of unimaginable, so big and complex but without high-tech design. Its creation is brute, rough, handmade. Everybody is all genders and multi-racial.

Everybody lies down indoors in theatres, outdoors in parks and in open public spaces. In repose, Everybody sleeps, breaths and stirs. Everybody is not just one puppet but a multitude of independent, roaming human body parts and organs; they are characters in their own epic tale of human existence.

Everybody is an immersive experience. Audiences can walk around, sit on, lie against, get inside, and cuddle up to Everybody and all its beautiful body parts. The giant human puppet is viewed in 360 degrees. Everybody, the experience, is a six-hour interactive art installation, or a 90-minute stage show.

The piece begins with the death of the giant human puppet via a brick thrown at Everybody’s head. The head cracks and its brain oozes out. Everybody watches its life flash before its eyes, from birth through life and ultimately death. Everybody’s now independent body parts and organs perform the journey of its life stages. Everybody is in 4 Acts: Everybody’s Born, Everybody Cries, Everybody Shits, Everybody Dies.

Human performers play audience members or passers-by who find themselves transported into, then flung out of, the brain of Everybody. Everybody is made up of: Mouth, Eye, Poo, Foot, Ear, Nose, Brain, Lungs, Baby, Penis, Vagina, Bum, Skin, Heart, Hand, Guts, Breast and Hair. And with guests, Pig and Brick.

Yay! I've been telling people for years we lived through a really unique period in music history with game soundtracks. We're kind of in the twilight of that now, but it brought us a lot of really oddball and interesting experimental music and new genre's (ish) along the way.

Open two windows and hit play on the second one when "Experimental Subject" black screen appears.

I thought it was clear-cut, but there appears to be some debate:
"Whether mathematics itself is properly classified as science has been a matter of some debate. Some thinkers see mathematicians as scientists, regarding physical experiments as inessential or mathematical proofs as equivalent to experiments. Others do not see mathematics as a science, since it does not require an experimental test of its theories and hypotheses. Mathematical theorems and formulas are obtained by logical derivations which presume axiomatic systems, rather than the combination of empirical observation and logical reasoning that has come to be known as the scientific method. In general, mathematics is classified as formal science, while natural and social sciences are classified as empirical sciences."
More on the subject here.

I don't think it's supposed to be taken in a general way and applied to "gay" people, but rather telling the story that isn't very often heard about those people who don't identify as either gay or straight, or who fall into the bisexual, asexual or questioning (gay/bi/trans curious) categories of the LGBT[QIA].

The truth is, we want to believe SO BADLY as a society that we are either gay or straight. And then we want to label ourselves to find community and identity SO BADLY, that some people get caught in the middle of two (or more!) different worlds, and that neither normative communities quite describe their sexuality. Hence the final comparison with the romantic comedy Sliding Doors. Also, that's why these crazy parties exist in the first place. (You're NOT invited.)

Let's see, there's:

L is for Lesbian, which is women's special gay letter. Technically you could just call LGBT, GBT, as some women identify as gay but not lesbian, or vice versa, or both. But women are special because of feminism, so they get L and G but men only get G.

Don't get on my ass because I speak the truth. I attend plenty enough GBT events to know the fluctuating social stigmas within the group, as well as the bitter rivalries between different letters of the acronym (or those who want to lengthen or shorten the representative letters). It's confusing to people who have this misconception that all stories of gay or lesbian people apply to all gay or lesbian people. It's so diverse, what's even the point of labels any more?

Anyway, moving on.

G is for Gay, which is women or men, but in common usage was (or is, depending on your perspective) for men. Yet as time goes on and the information age fills in our social gaps, women have begun to identify as gay. In fact, I have a genderfluid friend who was born female, but often identifies as a gay male, and has even been accepted into the ranks of the the Gay Men's Chorus. Take that label obsessed society!!

B is for Bisexual, which is a broad category that I'd say more aptly covers this situation, but even more so I think the Q (Questioning) with a little or a lot of A (Asexual) of the greater acronym LGBTQ or LGBTQIA is an even better term for these two star crossed lovers.

T is for Transgender, which is another broad category but with very specific splinter factions of crossdressers, transexuals, transvestites, genderfluid, etc. etc. Some of these terms, depending on the context are either outdated, have new or older and more specific defining characteristics, or even more often, people define themselves as the umbrella term itself, transgender, because the feelings of one or the other specifics oscillates and changes as transgender people (male and female) age. I know trans people of all ages and wow, the perspectives are vast, and are rarely consistent throughout the years. (You just DON'T know how you'll identify at the age of 65+.)

Q is for Questioning, which is for people who just don't know what they are. This one is really an open ended letter and often isn't included because it represents an ignorance of the self. Maybe you figure out your sexuality or gender specifics right away or maybe it takes you years of experimentation to find your niche. Or maybe you transcend the boundaries forever, always changing and never staying the same throughout the years. The main thing here is that you don't know. Maybe you have a gay romance and then you're like, "Damn, I'm definitely straight" and now you're not even part of LGBT. Q is like the gateway letter. lol

I is for Intersex, which is for people who have genitalia or other gender defining anatomy which is different, not entirely present, is equally both, or more of one than the other. Look it up, because I'm the least familiar with this one, though I do have friends who are intersex. I just haven't asked them enough specifics out of respect. Also, recent research into genetics has shown that you could have a portion of your body that isn't gender defining, but which is made up of the opposite sex's genetic code. I've heard of people who have had their toe or their heart identified as male, but the rest of their body is female. Some people will never even know they're intersex, and depending on what part of their body is intersex, may not experience any feelings other than their body's dominant sex. (I don't have a scientific link, but it was part of a topic that I attended at PRIDE.

A is for Asexual, which is for people who don't have sexual feelings, or who don't act on sexual feelings for any number of reasons intellectual, physical, or both. I don't know how broad this category is but I myself go through periods (sometimes years) of asexuality. A defining characteristic for some people who have misidentified as gay or bi. For example, my parents thought I was gay and I had friends who would openly call me gay, despite me not showing ANY sexual emotions towards either sex. Though I did have both guys and girls who would hit on me or have sex (oral or otherwise) with me on the down low, despite my half interest in both! People are curious and when you can't figure out someone's sexual identity, some people will lay it on so thick, it could be seen as sexual harassment. I knew several girls that just wanted to have sex with me so bad to figure out if I was gay or straight. I just didn't care about either sexes at the time, though I was pleasantly stimulated to varied effects.

I think this is the story that isn't told. If you're asexual or going through an asexual period, that doesn't make you gay!

There could be more movies or shorts out there telling this story, but this is the first honest look into the Q and A of LGBT that I've ever seen. Shit, and I thought when I published my book I'd be the first. Damn. heh

Talon fucking fusion reactor deathrays motherfuckas for less. You best not joke around about the systematic enslavery and experimentation of living, thinking, feeling space entities, BITCH. Recognize.

i am not surprised we pretty much agree.

you should always be careful with any substance and to be informed is the first step.
was i careful at 15 with double barrel purple mescaline?---->nope.i was 15.

but i think the argument is getting caught up in distinctions,which is common.
when i speak of psychedelics,i am talking about:LSD,shrooms,mescaline.
and while exstacy is considered a psychedelic,and it IS a psychedelic (and awesome btw),i also consider that drug to be more a "club" drug,a designer drug,and yes...it can be fatal because often it is NOT mdma/mda you're are taking but a cocktail of bullshit with a few experimental chemistry molecules thrown in...so your cautionary tale is not exactly unfounded..but i have never seen shagen even suggest mdma/mda but almost exclusively:DMT.

now,i am fairly cautious in suggesting DMT to the uninitiated due to the fact of its potency (even in small amounts).there is no small build up with DMT,it goes from first gear to 15th in 2.2 seconds,and for a newcomer that can easily overwhelm and frighten.

for psychedelics to produce a positive and healthy response there first has to be interest in trying psychedelics out.the worst thing you could EVER do is "hey man,i just filled your beer with shroom tea" (you would notice though,that shit tastes like concentrated ass).

the person should also be in the right frame of mind and be in a place and with people they feel comfortable with and trust (very important the first time).knowing the dosage is important but not as important as you would think,as long as you take things slow and with patient care..things will sort out nicely.

as for death and permanent brain damage.i am not familiar with any cases except for the movie they showed us in the 7th grade with helen hunt thinking she could fly,because she took acid.i know psychedelics can affect a personality permanently (usually for the better) but nothing life threatening.i know too high a dosage on a novice mind can cause a "bad" trip and leave an unpleasant memory of the experience.there have been cases of latent mental illnesses manifesting due to the psychedelics,but it didnt CAUSE the mental illness.

from my own personal experience and what i have read,psychedelics are pretty safe.they are not a toy.they are an extremely powerful psychoactive compound that should always be treated with respect and to ignore that can have consequences.

but i dont think death and permanent brain damage are on that list.

unless you decided to do something stupid while tripping,but that is evolution,not psychedelics.

i could always come to california and we could drink shroom kool-aid.hang out on the moutain-side and watch the sunset and by the time we are watching the sunrise we will have become blood brothers and watched the universe expand in glorious birth pangs and then collapse upon itself in its death throes.talked to stars and danced with super novas.find ourselves in a meadow,thinking we walked half the state only to realize we are a 1/4 mile from your back porch.

i promise good times my friend.good times indeed.