TrancesWithWolves

Redskins fan. Mostly serious about football & science. Other posts may contain satire, sarcasm, & a mocking distaste for current or former political leadership.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@fire_starter457 Happily he lives on forever in our dreams, and in our collective imagination.

Along with Peter Pan, The Tooth Fairy, Cinderella, Santa Claus, and a host of other great heroes spun out of whole cloth.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@Bella_91m7u For those trying to learn how to approach problems if this type.

This is a straight forward problem.
Attack it directly.

Start with the numerator:

1. -5 squared=
-5 x -5=
+25

2.
25 + 55 = 80

Then divide the numerator by the denominator:

80 ÷ 5 = 16

Final answer is 16

[Wholesome Side of 𝕏 @itsme_urstruly]

It is said that the bison is the only animal to turn and face a storm. To get through the blizzard faster. To not hide. To face difficult times head on. To meet the moment.

For the moment is all we have.

[Lucy @TheLucyShow1]

God bless Sophia and her amazing parents who selflessly cared for her during her short life. 🥹❤️🙏

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

I'm guessing 7.5" is average for non-African Americans, (we need a yard stick to properly measure the brothers j/k 😉 lol).

OK, getting serious now. Assuming an average erect member is about 7.5" in length then I'd say big is at least 1.5 standard deviations from the mean.

Let's arbitrarily say 0.75" is one standard deviation.

So 1.5 standard deviations would be about 1.125" let's say 1.13" rounding up.

So 7.5" plus 1.13" would say big starts at about 8.63" or 8 and 5/8"

So anything 8 5/8" long or more can legitimately earn the title of big.

As for girth, that's a whole nother thing

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@Ella_5b8 191

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

Not many answers to a well constructed query.

Two obvious reasons come to mind for the dearth of responses:

1. Very few people have actually tried this and those that have weren't that impressed by it.

Or...

2. Many have tried it and gained life changing insight from it and most of them as a direct result of these teachings have ascended from this veil of tears leaving the rest of us alone to suffer in ignorance without so much as an "Adios amigos!" on the way out.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@amazing_physics Simple answer if you just focus on 1 thing:

1. Which 3 out of these 4 attributes have certain similarities that the 4th doesn't have?

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@BholanathDutta The large triangle is equilateral.

So the angle where the blue and red lines intersect is 60°.

Going clockwise from the top, the angles of the small triangle are 60°, 30°(180°-150°), and 90° (180-60°-30°).

Therefore:
X= 90°.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@UchennaF28384 4x + x + 80°= 180°
5x = 100°

Final answer:
x= 20°

Not asked for but why not...

The final unknown angle is 80° which makes this an isoceles triangle with lines AB and CB equal in length.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@YourAnonNews According to my sources, Trump's stench is so vile that if he's in an enclosed area for more than 10 to 15 minutes flowers wilt, candles melt, and the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" dies.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

Today most remember and celebrate (justly so) Kepler, but he owed a great deal to the somewhat forgotton Tycho Brahe, who hired Kepler as an assistant to help him analyze decades worth of data that he and others had meticulously compiled on the movements of the heavenly bodies.

Without that crucial and precise data Kepler, a true mathematical genius, would have never had the evidence he needed to make the conclusions that changed the world and proved that the heavenly moved in predictable patterns that conformed to and could be measured by pure mathematical means.

One can not underestimate the critical importance of this discovery in the evolution of science and mans place within the world.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@BholanathDutta Old school methodology:

2x + 3x = 120
5x= 120
x=24

Therefore the correct answer is:

2x= 48°

Not asked for, but I'm a completionist by nature:

3x =72°

Old school, check your work:

If correct: 2x + 3x +60°= 180°

Check:
(2 x 24)° + (3 x 24)° +60° = 180°

[Jesse Michels @AlchemyAmerican]

🚨BREAKING: A cognitive scientist from MIT has mathematically proven that evolution guarantees we see zero percent of true reality, that most consciousness in the universe exists without a body, and that non-human intelligences with a wider window on reality than ours can reach in and manipulate it the way a programmer manipulates a video game.

Donald Hoffman (@donalddhoffman) is a cognitive scientist at UC Irvine who has spent 40 years building a mathematical theory of the observer. His work was cited by John Wheeler in the "It From Bit" paper. He studied under Marvin Minsky at MIT, spent two decades secretly meeting with Francis Crick to study consciousness, and has nine specific mathematical conjectures on the table that would derive general relativity, quantum field theory and the Big Bang from a single framework. The top high-energy physicists in the world, Nima Arkani-Hamed and Nobel laureate David Gross, are already saying spacetime is doomed. Hoffman thinks he knows what replaces it.

This interview is the first time he has publicly laid out what his mathematical model explains about alien life, embodiment and the structure of reality.

It already derives time dilation and quantum wave functions directly from differences in observer window size. Physics has spent a century failing to solve the measurement problem because it has been looking in the wrong place. The observer has to come first, and no physicalist framework can get you there.

A consciousness with a larger observer window has access to the underlying structure of our reality in ways we can't perceive or counter. A craft going Mach 40 instantaneously in our headset could be a leisurely maneuver in theirs.

The implications for UAP and alien life are immense.
Embodiment, being locked into a body with fingers and toes as your only interface with the world, is a probability zero anomaly in the full space of possible minds. He also says current large language models are dumber than cucumbers. His new framework, the recursive trace logic, is a completely different architecture, and some of the biggest names in frontier AI have already come to him about it.

The framework has no ceiling, and the implication is a single unified consciousness exploring itself through an unbounded number of perspectives, each one capable of waking up.

Death, in this framework, is just the closing of an icon on the desktop.

Full conversation is live now.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@EastEndJoe "I don't need no stinking air! I am Donald J. Trump, a pure Aryan he-man, a man mountain of a man and -400° F don't mean a damn thing to Donald J. Trump!"

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

I like this problem.

The top horizontal line is parallel with to the bottom horizontal line.

However, despite the middle line appearing to follow the grid line, which intuitively makes us think that it's parallel to the other two lines (which would make the angle equal to 115°) we can not assume that all three lines are parallel absent more data (ie proof).

Therefore, this problem is unsolvable in its current form.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@CreativelyOn @JeremyTate41 Yes, absolutely!

I'd also add The Great Gatsby and The Catcher In The Rye for sure and at least a half dozen more, if I took the time to think about it.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

I read all the books on that list at least once by 6th or 7th grade with the exception of The Scarlet Letter (which I still haven't read), Walden and Gulliver's Travels (which I read in high school), and Moby Dick (which I started several times but never actually finished until I was in my thirties).

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

I'm reminded of that famous sequence in 2001: A Space Odyssey when after the prehistoric man-ape first uses a tool (in this case a stick) to kill another rival and tosses it into the sky end over end and after it reaches its apogee and begins to tumble back to earth it morphs into a space craft.

Perhaps, it is the nature of man.

Perhaps the same drive that leads us to seek the moon and beyond, also pulls us towards both the destruction of others and the ultimate destruction of ourselves in the process.

Then again, perhaps we are here to overcome and go beyond our nature.

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@forallcurious Fart powered transportation!

Simply eat plenty of my Grandmas pinto beans, wait 20 minutes, and poof your off with a bang.

"To infinity and beyond!"

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@wangubaagu @Bella_91m7u Agreed! 👍

[TrancesWithWolves @VetMinimum]

@wangubaagu @Bella_91m7u Thank you for the clarification.