Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • @kurtking1 Agreed. This is why the 1-per-galaxy theory is more believable than t

    @kurtking1 Agreed. This is why the 1-per-galaxy theory is more believable than the many-per-galaxy theory.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-16 20:20:27 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107288594160440287

  • @Evidently There are very few other possibilities. It’s possible that there are

    @Evidently There are very few other possibilities. It’s possible that there are NO other possibilities. This is simply a matter of the combinatorics of forces, particles, elements, and molecules, in an environment of sufficient free energy, within a narrow temperature range. So just as very little of the universe resulted in mass, less in stars, less in planets, it appears that the number of means of ‘calculating’ stable relations is very narrow.

    Every single thing we discover in all the sciences trends to a very simple constitution and organization of the universe, from which a narrow range of evolutionary computation is possible.

    Much of the ‘woo woo’ in physics today (and the lack of scientific progress because of it) is due to a misunderstanding of mathematics and a strange taboo in the sciences against producing theoretical systems despite the misunderstanding of mathematics.

    It looks like the universe is much more simple than we thought, and that we are currently prisoners of some equivalent of ‘taboos’ from the prevoius century. And the presumption that enisteinian mathematics was other than an approximation that has failed to survive the tests of scale – just as did newton.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-16 18:08:11 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107288074060258515

  • THE RARITY OF LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE It’s far harder for a planet to survive in th

    THE RARITY OF LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

    It’s far harder for a planet to survive in the habitable zone than we think. You need a relatively peaceful galactic neighborhood. And a star that lives long enough and is stable enough for evolution to compute the possibility of complex life. You need a third or fourth-generation star so that there are metal elements available. You need a relatively rare type of star (yellow dwarf) that will provide a stable habitable zone. You need a metallic planet, which requires something like Jupiter or Jupiter AND Saturn to ‘clean the neighborhood’. You need a molten core on that metallic planet, and a large moon to keep it liquid, producing a protective magnetic field. And you need enough atmosphere, and enough water, and enough volcanic activity to start life.

    I mean, you’d think that there would be lots of life out there given that under the right conditions it’s going to likely emerge over time. But the bigger problem than calculating life is the environment in which the universe can calculate life.

    Tiny possibilities. Tiny. Likely a few per galaxy and they might not overlap in time.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-16 15:46:36 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107287517341531184

  • MORAL INTUITION AS EXPRESSION OF COMPETENCY by Western Renaissance I’m starting

    MORAL INTUITION AS EXPRESSION OF COMPETENCY
    by Western Renaissance

    I’m starting to think that what is going on with the whole NPC phenomenon, is that our frustrations, or complete lack thereof, are indicative of what level of responsibility we are able to take.

    If you’re frustrated by big things, then maybe this is a sign that you have the capacity to be responsible for big things.

    On the flip side, if you have no frustration, concern or opinion, is it a sign that you don’t have the capacity to take responsibility at that level?

    And that at whichever level people are capable of taking responsibility (none, self, family, community, state, country, world) this is where they express their frustrations?

    And if they have no frustration at a certain scale, it’s a sign of that scale being beyond their ability to take responsibility for?

    We are a hierarchical species, equality of ability is a lie and those of us who can take responsibility at large scale, yet who don’t, are selling ourselves, our society, our people, our children and our future short.

    This line of thinking is potentially life changing for me.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-16 02:10:24 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107284307958359208

  • WHY WHLL IT WORK? Because it P-Law a minor tweak to the most successful system o

    WHY WHLL IT WORK?

    Because it P-Law a minor tweak to the most successful system of government in human history, and the only one to create a modern state capable of bulding and maintaining itself as a first world power.

    There are a set of minor holes in our ‘operating system’ (Constitution, law, tradition, adn religion) through which the enemy can easily march. To the average person this seems unfixable. However it isn’t. The law creates a market for the suppression of criminality. We need only define the crimes in terms that the law can ‘scientifically’ test. And that’s what I’ve done.

    Put the infrastructure in place, and the rest will work. Because these ‘ordinary men’ will have the ability to follow their gut instincts: SUPPRESS WHAT IS IRRECIPROCAL, DISGUSTING, AND DISLOYAL.

    You see. That is what drives their intuitions. But they have no means of organizing that suppression and no means of disambiguating ithe irreciprocal disgusting and disloyal from that which is just ‘odd’ or inventive.

    So the only question is dominate and pay the cost of civilizing the enemy, or separate and let them pay the cost of their failures.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:59:18 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282848725506873

  • THE METHOD TO THE APPARENT MADNESS There is a very deep method to my apparent ma

    THE METHOD TO THE APPARENT MADNESS

    There is a very deep method to my apparent madness on the topic of the right’s tendency to fail. That method would be deprecated if I were to state it openly. But as I have demonstrated over the past decade, the use of via negativa king of the hill games tends to produce better outcomes than attempting to ‘sell’ the right. I am not selling. I’m illustrating the failure of every other right-wing fantasy as just that: cost evasion, pretense of unearned virtue, pretense of unearned morality, overconfidence because of all three, manifesting in cowardice. Belief means nothing. It is the feminine means of demanding men serve them. The right has evolved through Christianity, and having risen from germanic peasantry, is demanding service. It is not anglo saxon: creating sovereignty through demonstrated action. So either conservatives will learn to pay the cost of victory – or they will be defeated. Right now, everything conservative means is ‘cost evasion’ so that the enemy wins.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:57:12 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282840433419800

  • @dleetr WHY WILL IT WORK? Because it is a minor tweak to the most successful sys

    @dleetr WHY WILL IT WORK?
    Because it is a minor tweak to the most successful system of government in human history, and the only one to create a modern state capable of bulding and maintaining itself as a first world power.

    Put the infrastructure in place, and the rest will work. Because these ‘ordinary men’ will have the ability to follow their gut instincts: SUPPRESS WHAT IS IRRECIPROCAL, DISGUSTING, AND DISLOYAL.

    You see. That is what drives their intuitions. But they have no means of organizing that suppression and no means of disambiguating ithe irreciprocal disgusting and disloyal from that which is just ‘odd’ or inventive.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:55:46 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282834826482207

  • @dleetr There is a very deep method to my apparent madness on this topic. That m

    @dleetr There is a very deep method to my apparent madness on this topic. That method would be deprecated if I were to state it openly. But as I have demonstrated over the past decade, the use of via negativa king of the hill games tends to produce better outcomes than attempting to ‘sell’ the right. I am not selling. I’m illustrating the failure of every other right wing fantasy as just that: cost evasion, pretense of unearned virtue, pretense of unearne morality, overconfidence betcause of all three, manifesting in cowardice. Belief means nothing. It is the feminine means of demanding men serve them. The right has evolved through christianity, and having risen from germanic peasantry, is demanding service. It is not anglo saxon: creating sovereignty through demonstrated action. So either conservatives will learn to pay the cost of victory – or they will be defeated. Right now, everything conservative means is ‘cost evasion’ so that the enemy wins.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:53:27 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282825733242740

  • DUMB F—KS IN THE WHITE MOVEMENT — “grug, math.” — Math isn’t hard. Knowing w

    DUMB F—KS IN THE WHITE MOVEMENT

    — “grug, math.” —

    Math isn’t hard. Knowing what’s wrong with math (mathiness) is a bit hard. Knowing the difference between math, computation, operations, and cooperative transactions is hard. Knowing how to disambiguate all methods of computation (Grammars) isn’t hard. Knowing how to produce decidability across math, computation, operations, transactions, is fairly hard. Knowing how to construct formal law from that hierarchy is fairly hard. In other words, a single specialization tends to reinforce general ignorance, while comparative disciplines, in particular, comparison across all disciplines is quite hard because one must master every discipline.

    So, If you can’t comprehend it you can’t. Others can. Others do. And in particular, some mathematicians do, and that is why we are reforming mathematics to merge it with computation and operation and reversing counter-revolution against mathematics that began with Cantor and the attempt to unify mathematics and logic by set theory instead of (obviously in retrospect) unifying mathematics, computation, algorithm, operations, and set (verbal logic), with operations devolving into math on one end, and into set logic (verbal) on the other, by the removal of dimensions of subjectively testable reality.

    The reality is that you’re a chimp by comparison. You can’t even imagine that P-Law is as great a leap as empiricism was over theology, or science over empiricism, and is as meaningful as was darwin to biology.

    That’s ok. I wouldn’t expect you to. However, I do understand that others do and do demonstrate that knowledge.

    “You are but a measure of your own ignorance.”

    Cheers. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:30:23 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282735003581114

  • @WhitesAdvocate Like I said. You’re too much of a dumb fuck for this conversatio

    @WhitesAdvocate Like I said. You’re too much of a dumb fuck for this conversation. So go find a smaller fire hydrant to piss on while you continue your fail.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:29:19 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282730808450896