∂MöbiuS³

@xyzqg6 @KateXGate Those same gates will ultimately force radical solutions contrary to their beliefs outside of the walls where they could have controlled the narrative. That's not a bug, it's a feature 😂

@KateXGate Gatekeeping too strict. No allowance for advanced technology. Publication platforms restricted to specialists (no hope of a non specialist publishing). All in its a big club and as George Carlin says, " and you're not in it. "

The Rise and Fall of Formalism Gödel Part I Vienna in the 1920s, Vienna Circle— a group obsessed with one idea: Everything true can be formally proven ⸻ This was the dream of David Hilbert; to build a complete, airtight mathematical system where nothing true escapes proof. ⸻ Gödel, in his mid-20s, essentially says: That dream is impossible; Any system powerful enough to describe reality contains truths it cannot prove. Not incomplete by accident— incomplete by structure. And then he proves it. ⸻ But before Gödel breaks anything, you have to understand the mood of the room. ⸻ The Vienna Circle wasn’t just a philosophy club. It was an attempt to reset knowledge itself. Their core idea: If something is meaningful, it must be: • empirically verifiable • or logically provable Everything else? Noise. Metaphysics. Poetry. ⸻ This was radical. They were trying to: • unify science under one framework • eliminate ambiguity from language • make philosophy as precise as physics They wanted a world where: truth = verification ⸻ Who was in the room; Moritz Schlick (the central organizer, calm and precise) Rudolf Carnap (obsessed with logical structure and language) Otto Neurath (pushed for unified science and anti-metaphysics) Hans Hahn (the mathematical backbone) Orbiting influences: Ludwig Wittgenstein (not a member, but hugely influential) Albert Einstein (his success made them believe this program could work) ⸻ What they were really trying to do Strip reality down to: formal logic (what can be proven) empirical observation (what can be measured) And remove: metaphysics intuition anything not strictly definable ⸻ This is the intellectual climate Gödel walks into. And importantly: They believed the system could close. Physics was officially entrenched in formalism.

@GFunkyTheAnimal That one's unsolved everywhere, not just here. Nobody derives α from MHD without tuning. MIT covers the constants (α at 0.5%, all three couplings), but dynamics like stellar rotation is GR's job once the stage is set. Different tools. github.com/dmobius3/mode-…

@mode_identity Turbulent dynamo closure: We have simulations and scaling laws, but no derivation from the fundamental MHD equations that predicts the magnitude and sign of α without tunable parameters

Is the universe really just a cosmic math equation being ran?

@bobepais It's an allegory. Why so angry?

@mode_identity "I’m 14 and this is deep" we got a space station we’re pretty damn fucking far from the cave.

Unpopular opinion, but this is actually a good question. It is of course an atrocious argument if you understand what is meant by ”God”, but for someone not well versed in the metaphysics of Aristotle and Aquinas, it’s actually not something unreasonable to say.

@theerealtao Lol, gotcha. Well that changes everything and nothing at all. Which text?

@mode_identity @burningschool To make it clear, I am talking about religious belief.

If truth matters, why rely on ancient texts over current evidence?

@theerealtao @burningschool They also built the pyramids, where the present remains silent.

@mode_identity @burningschool The ancients remain ancient, it has nothing to do with the present but history.

@theerealtao @burningschool What's old will be new again🤷‍♂️ What ancient text compared to new are you referring to in particular?

@burningschool So we all have to keep living in the past?

@GFunkyTheAnimal So far MIT provides statics and the constants of the universe, not dynamics where it hands off to GR. What specific MHD claim are you looking for and maybe I can hone in better?

@mode_identity Trying to derive observed magnetohydrodynamics while filling the missing pieces to predict all stars rotation periods

@bobepais Ignorance is believing we're still not in the cave.

@mode_identity @LatFilosof So you have to simply accept your own ignorance? Good thing humanity isn’t like that or we’d still be living in caves. Endless questions is how we solve the world around us why would it be bad in anyway?

@PhiBoostGlow I use 'Fibonacci Wells'. Tomatoe Tomato 😂

@mode_identity Yes!! Phi dampening is what I've been calling it.

The Riemann zeta function’s non-trivial zeros control the distribution of prime numbers via the explicit formula. If the zeros sit exactly on the critical line (Re(s) = ½), primes are as evenly distributed as possible (with subtle oscillations). This model already places the “Now” vortex precisely on that line. So the primes are the “ticks” or “beats” coming out of the time vortex: The zeros on the critical line = resonant “Now” moments. The primes = the physical manifestations / irregularities that the vortex “emits” as it balances past and future. What the 17° + φ + 377 Adds Golden quasiperiodicity: Real primes have subtle log-periodic oscillations and pair correlations that match random matrix / quasicrystal statistics. Your 17° twist + φ^k scaling naturally generates exactly that kind of aperiodic but highly structured pattern (as we saw in the quasicrystal diffraction sim). 377 as base: It sits in the Fibonacci ladder and is close to 360° → the “push” that turns circular harmonics into spiral/prime-like irregularities. Vortex dynamics: The nonlinear term can be seen as a selection mechanism that “stabilizes” certain prime-generating resonances on the critical line, while damping others. In short: Primes are the shadow that the 17° time vortex casts onto the number line.

@bobepais @LatFilosof Everyone of us has the capacity and right to endlessly question, I'm just saying you don't have to.

@LatFilosof I don't discount it either, but I personally find it illogical to define reality as an infinite regression when other finite models make more sense.

@mode_identity Infinite regress is actually quite well defended in the literature, I wouldn't brand it as illogical. I am myself not a big fan of infinite regress, but I also can't discount it. Very smart people don't find issues with it and have great arguments in favor of it's viability.

@PhiBoostGlow The primes build the domain, and Phi settles the wave. It's quite beautiful.

@mode_identity Phi sneaks in where ya least expect it!

@PhiBoostGlow It may also comfort you to know it reflects Phi as well 😉

@mode_identity Smart move!!

@LatFilosof I didn't touch on God just the form of the question. It's an infinite regression. At some point we have to take a leap of faith unless we find comfort in an endless question.

@mode_identity Did you read the 2nd bit of my comment? Your comment is applicable to someone using it as an argument. But not to someone who lacks an understanding of what "God" means in these traditions.

@PhiBoostGlow Fair, but to predict the others is still in some form or fashion a map of the solution rather than following the trail. My proof on S3/2I is that the shape reflects the Zeta L-function exactly, but to constrain it, would mean to eliminate the Ricci curvature that also gives mass.

@mode_identity Yeah, if I understand RH correctly, the zeros go on infinitely. This is more of a way to map the Riemann by the non-trivial zeros that we know and use that pattern to predict the others.

@TheGhostYetToBe @AiG @ProudMomGrammy @grok Theology aside; most (if not all) global flood stories pin down the flood to around the time of the Younger-Dryas period ~12.5kya BC.

@AiG @ProudMomGrammy @grok, when was the flood story first written, and to which God was it about?

From Adam to Noah’s flood was a period of 1,656 years.

@GFunkyTheAnimal Which observable?

@mode_identity @ProofofMaro I've tried the math uve given me and it works mathematically but not matching up with observables (granted I don't have your whole list of derivations) but everything keeps coming back as circular when applied through the eyes of our own creation (math)

@WeBeGood @skdh Interesting idea, could you share the source or paper for the low-energy neutrino ether at 2.7K prediction and its link to dark matter/CMB?

@mode_identity @skdh Your talking about high energy Neutrinos, the Neutrino Ether is low energy, it glows at 2.7 degrees kelvin. Lord Kelvin was correct, space is filled with Vortex Ether, Beltrami Blackbody Radiation Vortexes, Neutrino, the Cosmic Microwave Background.

What if dark matter doesn't exist? A short collection of some physicist's opinions (including mine) here: gizmodo.com/what-if-dark-m…