Curt Doolittle

Form: Short Note

  • French Quiche, Pastry, Cheese and egg. German Strudel. Pastry, no (or little) ch

    French Quiche, Pastry, Cheese and egg. German Strudel. Pastry, no (or little) cheese, no egg. Italian Calzone, Pastry, Cheese, no egg. English ‘Pie’. Pastry, no (or little) cheese, no (or little) egg. American Sandwich. Bread, cheese, no egg.

  • French Quiche, Pastry, Cheese and egg. German Strudel. Pastry, no (or little) ch

    French Quiche, Pastry, Cheese and egg.

    German Strudel. Pastry, no (or little) cheese, no egg.

    Italian Calzone, Pastry, Cheese, no egg.

    English ‘Pie’. Pastry, no (or little) cheese, no (or little) egg.

    American Sandwich. Bread, cheese, no egg.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-18 10:25:00 UTC

  • French Quiche, Pastry, Cheese and egg. German Strudel. Pastry, no (or little) ch

    French Quiche, Pastry, Cheese and egg. German Strudel. Pastry, no (or little) cheese, no egg. Italian Calzone, Pastry, Cheese, no egg. English ‘Pie’. Pastry, no (or little) cheese, no (or little) egg. American Sandwich. Bread, cheese, no egg.

  • Click for video: videos/10000000_148836895867664_3674976831108284416_n_101558878

    Click for video: videos/10000000_148836895867664_3674976831108284416_n_10155887857227264.mp4

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-16 16:41:00 UTC

  • Click for video: photos_and_videos/videos/10000000_144190829558632_5246782785242

    Click for video: photos_and_videos/videos/10000000_144190829558632_5246782785242267648_n_10155887798042264.mp4 Live from Yale (Starbucks)Group: Meta /// ChanAidan SearsOh boiNov 16, 2017 4:18pmGroup: Meta /// ChanSeonaidh MacGobhainGood day Gents!Nov 16, 2017 4:19pmGroup: Meta /// ChanStuart SüdekumI love those dinosaur paintings!Nov 16, 2017 4:19pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJames BrittinghamHey guys.Nov 16, 2017 4:20pmGroup: Meta /// ChanAnne SummersHeyee! Good to see you.Nov 16, 2017 4:20pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeff OdgisHigh Right!Nov 16, 2017 4:21pmGroup: Meta /// ChanAidan SearsTop ten anime crossoversNov 16, 2017 4:22pmGroup: Meta /// ChanCharles HesseyoooNov 16, 2017 4:24pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeff OdgisThose were the days; good riddance to analog deprivationNov 16, 2017 4:25pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeffery McCarthy HughesHowdy gentlemenNov 16, 2017 4:26pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeff OdgisWorking over the telephone @[206543704000:274:Phone Losers of America]Nov 16, 2017 4:26pmGroup: Meta /// ChanCharles HesseIs that @[605597:2048:Kashif Vikaas] on the left?Nov 16, 2017 4:26pmGroup: Meta /// ChanCurt DoolittleYesNov 16, 2017 4:27pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeffery McCarthy HughesEase of research produces indolenceNov 16, 2017 4:27pmGroup: Meta /// ChanStuart SüdekumGoogle books is a pretty good justification for the technological nightmare future we live in.Nov 16, 2017 4:27pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeffery McCarthy HughesLanguage that trancends all characters and numerals is geometryNov 16, 2017 4:28pmGroup: Meta /// ChanStuart SüdekumThe ooze in TMNT?Nov 16, 2017 4:30pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeffery McCarthy HughesUltra materialism in science begins with rejection of the 0, as it’s tangent has served it’s purposeNov 16, 2017 4:34pmGroup: Meta /// ChanDavid StennettHmmm, I could use a venti hot chocolate and cinnemon roll from Starbucks right about now … but then I remember that Schutlz is a cock.Nov 16, 2017 4:35pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeffery McCarthy HughesEquilateral triad?Nov 16, 2017 4:36pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeff OdgisExcellent analysis CurtNov 16, 2017 4:36pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeffery McCarthy HughesAI won’t work in binary, and all programming language is too taxonomicNov 16, 2017 4:38pmGroup: Meta /// ChanCurt DoolittleBrett–I’m working on a self-referencing triad of political reconciliation in the meta-right. The essay with @[100011057055806:2048:Aedhan] it should be out soon in Counter-Currents–KashifNov 16, 2017 4:40pmGroup: Meta /// ChanEric BumpusWhat happens when AI comes to the conclusion that it has not power over its own existence? It decides that we can terminate it at any time and it needs to have sovereignty over its own life.Nov 16, 2017 4:41pmGroup: Meta /// ChanJeff OdgisSeems the video abruptly terminatedNov 16, 2017 4:44pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom TomorrowWould have to be a self-referencing tercenary systemNov 16, 2017 4:44pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom TomorrowYES :PNov 16, 2017 4:45pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom Tomorrow@[100000595185452:2048:Matt Nagy] combined with some advancements coming out of metamodernism in the next few months we can build a foundation for computer science to understand language in the most reduced manner even while accounting for postmodernismNov 16, 2017 4:47pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom TomorrowThat would be the goal. Building it would take 5 years of full-time work from inception to endNov 16, 2017 4:54pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom TomorrowWe’ll put you to work don’t worryNov 16, 2017 4:56pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom Tomorrow;)Nov 16, 2017 4:58pmGroup: Meta /// ChanMichael PattinsonCheers Curt Doolittle , you are my hero!Nov 16, 2017 5:37pmGroup: Meta /// ChanWyatt PipohCurt that scarf is dashingNov 16, 2017 7:45pmGroup: Meta /// ChanRoy D. CunninghamYale University? What is the Alt Right population at Yale?Nov 16, 2017 7:47pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom Tomorrow1%Nov 16, 2017 7:48pmGroup: Meta /// ChanRoy D. CunninghamWe need to bump those numbers up.Nov 16, 2017 7:50pmGroup: Meta /// ChanTom TomorrowWe’ll put a few people in their philosophy departmentNov 16, 2017 7:50pmGroup: Meta /// ChanChrissy McClellanFound this on The Frederick Douglass Papers page https://www.pcmag.com/commentary/350984/digital-humanities-the-most-exciting-field-youve-never-heaNov 17, 2017 9:46amGroup: Meta /// ChanWilliam L. BengeBallarinas? Well, ya! pahaNov 17, 2017 10:06amGroup: Meta /// ChanWilliam L. BengeA multiplicity of interests are queued up, awaiting this new language technology. We’re making progress.

    Push onward, brothers! Changing the world…Nov 17, 2017 10:39amGroup: Meta /// ChanAndrew Taylor@[1001605662:2048:Thomas Caussat]Nov 17, 2017 2:27pmGroup: Meta /// ChanSpencer JohnsonHelloJul 14, 2018 2:04amGroup: Meta /// ChanNeil A. Bucklewmissed it. where is the rest?Jul 14, 2018 3:47amGroup: Meta /// ChanPeter Isaac Simon😍Jul 14, 2018 7:50amGroup: Meta /// ChanPeter Isaac SimonCurt why does Jennifer (and others) find it hard to trust you?Jul 14, 2018 7:51amGroup: Meta /// ChanPeter Isaac SimonCheers Kaashif, I would follow you into Armageddon.Jul 14, 2018 7:52amLive from Yale (Starbucks)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-16 16:17:00 UTC

  • Click for video: videos/10000000_144190829558632_5246782785242267648_n_101558877

    Click for video: videos/10000000_144190829558632_5246782785242267648_n_10155887798042264.mp4 Live from Yale (Starbucks)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-16 16:17:00 UTC

  • CLARITY (TIME) —“We are constantly moving through spacetime but we just trade

    CLARITY (TIME)

    —“We are constantly moving through spacetime but we just trade movement in time for movement in space and vice versa, just like a function in cartesian space trades position in the x axis for position in the y axis. Gravity is reducible to a change in the elasticity of that trade.”—Thomas Wiltshire

    Simple.

    WHY IS CURT WRITING ABOUT THIS:

    Today. One philosopher and four physicists debating time, and sounding like a bunch of chipmunks. The underlying question is whether what we call time (rate of change) is merely altered by the expansion and contraction of space, or whether it is a product of the expansion and contraction of space.

    I can’t understand logically how it can be the latter, and still produce a dynamic universe of ANY kind.

    And as far as i know that is the the question, and we can’t answer it.

    But saying that time doesn’t exist is just pseudoscience. And we don’t know more than that (that I know of). And I haven’t ever encountered anything in physics that I can’t understand once we state it operationally.

    The universe is not complicated it is merley causally dense with operations (symmetries) forming by coincidence at increasingly complex (dense) levels.

    I have seen nothing in the universe at ALL that cannot be represented mathematically and geometrically once we understand the prevailing forces.

    The history of human knowledge expansion is this: everything is far more simple than we intuit. It’s people who are complicated. Because most of what we do is ‘lie’.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-16 12:51:00 UTC

  • Clarity (Time)

    —“We are constantly moving through spacetime but we just trade movement in time for movement in space and vice versa, just like a function in cartesian space trades position in the x axis for position in the y axis. Gravity is reducible to a change in the elasticity of that trade.”—Thomas Wiltshire Simple. WHY IS CURT WRITING ABOUT THIS: Today. One philosopher and four physicists debating time, and sounding like a bunch of chipmunks. The underlying question is whether what we call time (rate of change) is merely altered by the expansion and contraction of space, or whether it is a product of the expansion and contraction of space. I can’t understand logically how it can be the latter, and still produce a dynamic universe of ANY kind. And as far as i know that is the the question, and we can’t answer it. But saying that time doesn’t exist is just pseudoscience. And we don’t know more than that (that I know of). And I haven’t ever encountered anything in physics that I can’t understand once we state it operationally. The universe is not complicated it is merley causally dense with operations (symmetries) forming by coincidence at increasingly complex (dense) levels. I have seen nothing in the universe at ALL that cannot be represented mathematically and geometrically once we understand the prevailing forces. The history of human knowledge expansion is this: everything is far more simple than we intuit. It’s people who are complicated. Because most of what we do is ‘lie’.

  • Clarity (Time)

    —“We are constantly moving through spacetime but we just trade movement in time for movement in space and vice versa, just like a function in cartesian space trades position in the x axis for position in the y axis. Gravity is reducible to a change in the elasticity of that trade.”—Thomas Wiltshire Simple. WHY IS CURT WRITING ABOUT THIS: Today. One philosopher and four physicists debating time, and sounding like a bunch of chipmunks. The underlying question is whether what we call time (rate of change) is merely altered by the expansion and contraction of space, or whether it is a product of the expansion and contraction of space. I can’t understand logically how it can be the latter, and still produce a dynamic universe of ANY kind. And as far as i know that is the the question, and we can’t answer it. But saying that time doesn’t exist is just pseudoscience. And we don’t know more than that (that I know of). And I haven’t ever encountered anything in physics that I can’t understand once we state it operationally. The universe is not complicated it is merley causally dense with operations (symmetries) forming by coincidence at increasingly complex (dense) levels. I have seen nothing in the universe at ALL that cannot be represented mathematically and geometrically once we understand the prevailing forces. The history of human knowledge expansion is this: everything is far more simple than we intuit. It’s people who are complicated. Because most of what we do is ‘lie’.

  • Yes, social media increases suicide rates among teens. Of course it does. I thou

    Yes, social media increases suicide rates among teens. Of course it does. I thought it was obvious. The question is whether or not it’s a bad thing to remove them from the pool. I think it’s a bad thing, since hormones are basically undesirable drugs being thrown into your brain for reasons of evolutionary and reproductive necessity.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-14 10:15:00 UTC