F.K. Boss

Want to decentralize the energy market?
Let's discuss synergies.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

https://t.co/r7TcXfnXRf

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@planethunter56

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@michael_nielsen Also interesting: "Dark matter halos" formed entirely from radiation in galactical orbit.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@davidwhogg @JannaLevin Acceleration is conversion of time flow to space flow.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@Bitgor @CymaticJoule Theory can be a matter of fact (e.g. mathematical theory). Theory isn't necessarily speculative.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@Deepfryguy76 The argument is basically that because strong gravity and measurements both can reduce uncertainty, it's the same thing. Ultimately it becomes a question of language, but I don't think definitions like that makes anybody wiser.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@Deepfryguy76 Yes it's very baity and relies on a broken (but unfortunately mainstream) interpretation of the superposition-state. Superposition is a model state of uncertainty, not a physical state of being many things at once. "Observation" doesn't set outcomes, interactions do.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@HunahpuY @RepThomasMassie @elonmusk @SenSchumer It's not, as there's no relationship between the things you mentioned. If the regulation of one thing implies it's possible to adequately regulate another unrelated thing, then why doesn't it apply to all other unrelated things?

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

@elonmusk @SenSchumer If AI is outlawed, only those outside of the law will have AI.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@Real___Gabriel @RepThomasMassie @elonmusk @SenSchumer If the answer is "nothing", why regulate it?

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@hanyixin344 @Rainmaker1973 It's not.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@Deepfryguy76 @BobMcGwier_N4HY The halo distribution strongly suggest that its an error in field representation imo (which axions also kind of does). I think it's better to keep particles out of it, unless there is some clearly quantized behaviour/pattern occuring (which there isn't).

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@Deepfryguy76 @BobMcGwier_N4HY My takeaway from the article is that wimps can't explain dm, rather than new "evidence" for axions. Introducing unobservable "particles" without particle-like characteristics doesn't make sense to me. To me it looks like a reframing of the problem that makes it more obfuscated.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@DelPierr111 @Deepfryguy76 Thanks! :)

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@DelPierr111 @Deepfryguy76 I haven't published anything. The only writing I have done is in the form of unstructured personal notes. But I work a bit now & then on putting them into a more readable format, and plan to publish in due time.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@DelPierr111 @Deepfryguy76 I can see various different explanations for such a concentration of energy. For example photon emission trough changes in chemical bonds, or a change of resonant frequency. The docking could cause either of these thing to happen, in both transient and permanent manners.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@DelPierr111 @Deepfryguy76 My working hypothesis has been that's it's been related to a significant concentration of energy, resulting in shorter waves being able to resolve smaller scales, reaching different topologies & reducing the passage of time to rate where it becomes unrecognizable.

[F.K. Boss @fkenboss]

@elonmusk The strong argument against "AI safety" is that it would give people who don't give a shit about regulations & agreements an advantage. It's a restriction of digital arms which can't be adequately implemented.