Mike Pearson

317 posts

Mike Pearson banner
Mike Pearson

Mike Pearson

@LDS_Science

Intelligence, truth, light, meaning

Sumali Ocak 2025
27 Sinusundan17 Mga Tagasunod
Naka-pin na Tweet
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
If you're not willing to fully consider an idea, you will never know if it is true, no matter how much evidence there is for it. You have to be willing to make any change in your life to know truth. This is why it is critical for humans to practice giving up things they like.
English
1
0
2
95
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
@m3po22 @ze_rusty @radumpopescu This guy hates truth. Immediately blocked. He didn't even look at the math or data. Just a satchel salesmen. What a thing to sell your integrity for.
Mike Pearson tweet media
English
0
0
0
8
Michael Pearson
Michael Pearson@m3po22·
@ze_rusty @radumpopescu You're all retards. x.com/m3po22/status/…
Michael Pearson@m3po22

The most powerful Bluetooth signal interacts with the same molecule only once every 100 seconds. That's 10^-15 as much as would be needed to constructively vibrate the molecule. For phone signals 100x more powerful that's still at most 10^-13 as much as required. The only significant effect is thermal. I would recommend learning more physics to correct your intuition, because it's wildly off. That's most people, however, so don't feel bad. But okay, let's look at the study. The video I posted is relevant because it showed how studies can be totally meaningless and still get spread by ignorant people biased against technology. This one is fun because it's the opposite bias. But let's look at this specific one, shared by a guy who can't capitalize his sentences and says stuff like "a increased risk." I'll posit some ways in which it could be wrong that are each stronger than what you posited for a mechanism: 1. Survival bias/confounding (biggest issue highlighted by everyone) 2. Possible subtle thermal effects / warming (ironic) 3. Blinding limitations 4. Housing/exposure system artifacts 5. Unrealistic exposure 6. Statistical & multiple-testing issues 7. Researcher handling & other rat effects 8. Species/sex specificity & inconsistency 9. Reanalysis-specific limitations 10. Broader context & lack of replication Details: grok.com/share/c2hhcmQt…

English
1
0
0
5
Rusty ⚡️: Solar Powered ☀️
Rusty ⚡️: Solar Powered ☀️@ze_rusty·
People who carried their cellphone in their LEFT pocket for 30,000+ hours were 12x more likely to develop a colon tumor on that SAME side. 12 TIMES. Phone goes in the satchel, not your pocket.
Rusty ⚡️: Solar Powered ☀️ tweet media
Rusty ⚡️: Solar Powered ☀️@ze_rusty

Bring Back Men’s Satchel. Not for fashion. But for survival. When your cellphone is in your pocket, It is effectively 0mm from your skin. Put it in a satchel and you gain at least 2-3cm of distance. Thanks to the Inverse Square Law, Going from 0mm to 2cm cuts the near-field radiation intensity by more than 10x That small gap creates a massive drop in the wireless RF radiation your body absorbs. Get the cellphone out of your pocket. Get a Bag. Make Men's Satchel Great Again!

English
115
1.1K
4.2K
438.3K
Mike Pearson nag-retweet
Sabine Hossenfelder
Sabine Hossenfelder@skdh·
The double slit experiment is the probably most misunderstood experiment ever. I have no idea who created the myth that if you 'look' at one of the slits, then the particles (photons/electrons) stop behaving as waves. It's wrong! They of course STILL behave as waves! Because particles are also waves, always. Photons and electrons make a self-interference EVEN ON A SINGLE slit. Don't believe it? Below an actual measurement from a laser diffracting on a single/double slit from Wikipedia. What happens if you measure which slit the particle goes through is that you get no interference between BOTH slits. And no, you don't need a conscious observer for this. Believe it or not, there have actually been experiments where they had people literally look at a double slit to see if that makes any difference and the answer is no, it does not. The entire mystery of the double slit is in the path of the particle TO the double slit. Because it seems that the particle must "know" whether it WILL be measured at one of the slits before it even gets there. It must "know" whether to go through both or just pick one. Seems like the future influences the past? Not really, it just means you have a consistency condition on the time evolution.
Sabine Hossenfelder tweet media
English
314
167
1.6K
136.6K
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
A single infrared photon can come from any warm object, including inside the human body itself. And multiple photons don't combine to create higher energy photons except in rare media like crystals where green laser light is synthesized. Such a weak photon can only meaningfully transfer heat to the human body. And I wasn't talking about the quoted thread. I had already addressed that one. The image shared at the top here just had no source. x.com/LDS_Science/st…
English
1
0
0
16
Danny
Danny@danfarnsy·
@LDS_Science You don’t even know what the context is here or what you’re responding to, otherwise you would have already clicked through and read the link without asking me to give you a link. Bad faith and bad manners.
English
1
0
0
21
Danny
Danny@danfarnsy·
@LDS_Science @cremieuxrecueil @veritasium It dissipates as heat, yes. It could modulate the behavior and interaction between molecules before it does. You asked for a possible mechanism, and I obliged. It's still your turn to posit where the analysis that showed *some effects* above is wrong. Tumors are not all effects.
English
1
0
0
22
Danny
Danny@danfarnsy·
@LDS_Science @cremieuxrecueil Driving frequency could be near resonances of longer, more complex molecules, introducing errors to trigger hormesis. Just to humor your question. Now it's your turn to posit how the data that shows there was something doesn't actually.
English
1
0
0
25
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
Oh no. I've enjoyed your nuance on most issues, but this is really not good. It's like saying that some amount of collision is good because when humans collide with meat and vegetables their health improves, and then deciding that car collisions must then also be good. "Radiation" just means "stuff that radiates." You can have totally different substances and they're all called "radiation." Alpha particle radiation is made of heavy clumps of two protons and two neutrons. Uranium-238 is an example source of alpha particle radiation. Meanwhile, nutrino radiation consists of particles ~10^-9 lighter than alpha particles, and 100 trillion of them pass through your body every second. They are so hard to capture that we had to build the Super-Kamiokande nutrino detector in Japan. That's how hard it is to get that kind of "radiation" to have any measurable effect on anything whatsoever. Now what were you saying about "radiation"? Even with photons (light) you can have extremely different energy levels and effects. The most energetic photon ever measured is 24 orders of magnitude difference. That's about the difference between the size of an atom and the size of Pluto's orbit. Saying that bluetooth or microwaves cause cancer is like saying pillows cause stab wounds. Infrared interacts less with the body than visible light does.
Mike Pearson tweet media
English
0
0
0
31
Danny
Danny@danfarnsy·
@cremieuxrecueil Nice. There has been a reflexive dismissal of the idea that RF frequency radiation could cause health effects because it's not ionizing, but this doesn't support that claim. RF does something!
English
1
0
6
834
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
@BrandonLuuMD Then surely just thinking about the ideas instead would result in even more learning. That worked for me in college—learned much more when I didn't take notes and just considered what the professor was saying.
English
1
0
1
341
Brandon Luu, MD
Brandon Luu, MD@BrandonLuuMD·
Students who took notes by hand scored ~28% higher on conceptual questions than laptop note-takers. Writing forces your brain to process and compress ideas instead of copying them.
Brandon Luu, MD tweet media
English
447
5.2K
24.5K
1.6M
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
@IterIntellectus HUMANS ARE NOT BLANK SLATES. Read the parable of the sower. Communists have been around for a long time; the decline in psychological health is what made room for it to finally grow here in America.
English
0
0
0
54
vittorio
vittorio@IterIntellectus·
something went terribly wrong and I don’t think it was an accident
English
48
56
2K
80.8K
vittorio
vittorio@IterIntellectus·
an insane blackpill is watching old movies you don’t even have to go back in time that long. watch any movie of the early 2000 a completely different universe. places and cities you’d want to live in, not the shitholes they’ve become
English
656
2.5K
35.3K
1.3M
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
@jkdavis89 I knew missionaries who had to go home early and it was really sad but I don't quite understand this reaction. You just have been in the Sendai mission itself and known people who died
English
1
0
0
113
Mike Pearson
Mike Pearson@LDS_Science·
630-670nm is used for red light therapy. 20 mW/cm^2 typical power flux. Sunlight is 100-137mW/cm^2 and a lot of that is in the same range (see G, H, I in this image). If it's 1/6th, then that's equal to the amount from RLT. Sessions tend to be around 20 minutes, right? Lots of people already get that much sun exposure. And if you look at the other light sources, hours under those would add up quite significantly, although I haven't done the math. Humans are fascinated by lights and it's very psychologically meaningful. Unless these studies make it very, very clear that placebo was completely controlled for, I am very skeptical.
Mike Pearson tweet media
English
0
0
0
17
alfred 🍀
alfred 🍀@HealthyAlfred·
Correct - but white light spreads energy across all wavelengths. Red light therapy = concentrated 660nm at high intensity. White bulb has some red but not enough focused power at that specific wavelength to trigger collagen production. Like sunlight vs laser - both have red, totally different intensity.
English
1
0
1
117
alfred 🍀
alfred 🍀@HealthyAlfred·
660nm red light increased collagen density by 31% and reduced wrinkle depth significantly in 12 weeks - triggering fibroblasts to produce collagen from light energy, not topical chemicals. Wrinkles getting deeper every year? Skin sagging despite expensive creams? Fine lines visible even without expressions? Your fibroblasts stopped producing collagen: • Production declining 1% yearly after 25 • Cells lack energy signal to rebuild • Structure collapsing without synthesis Study: 660nm red light therapy 12 weeks: → Collagen density: +31% → Elastin fibers: significantly increased → Wrinkle depth: measurably reduced → Skin thickness: increased (ultrasound confirmed) Topical serums? Surface hydration, zero collagen building signal. The mechanism: 660nm wavelength penetrates dermis → absorbed by mitochondria in fibroblasts → increases ATP production → ATP signals collagen gene activation → new collagen synthesis triggered → skin rebuilds from within Why wavelength matters: • 660nm: reaches dermis (where fibroblasts live) • Blue/green: too shallow (epidermis only) • 850nm: too deep (passes through to muscle) Timeline: Week 2-4: Skin texture smoother Week 6-8: Fine lines visibly reducing Week 12: Collagen 31% higher, wrinkle depth decreased Protocol: 10-20 minutes daily, 660nm red light, 6-12 inches from skin Your aging skin isn’t “lack of products.” Your fibroblasts lack the energy signal to produce collagen. 660nm red light. 10-20 min daily. Mitochondria activated. Collagen restarts.
alfred 🍀 tweet mediaalfred 🍀 tweet media
English
27
161
1.7K
73.5K
Autism Capital 🧩
Autism Capital 🧩@AutismCapital·
TLDR: GLP-1s make you unable to fall in love. They reduce desire. They reduce feelings of connection. Basically everyone becomes the beautiful mice in the mouse park experiment where they look really good but stop reproducing. They just mog but never breed. Anhedonic vessels.
Dr. Shin Geon-yeong (神建永), Ph.D.@asparagoid

We initially thought GLP-1s like Ozempic, Tirzapeptide and Retatutride just reduced food cravings. Now, we know they work for alcohol, cocaine, gambling and other addictions too But do you know what runs on exactly the same circuit? Falling in love GLP-1 receptors sit in the exact same brain regions that light up when you’re in love The insane thing about them is that they don’t just suppress appetite. They suppress wanting in general, including romantic craving another person Something like 60M+ people are now on anti-desire drugs and it happened in the blink of an eye I predict in the coming years, we will see people on these drugs be less able to fall in love. We will also see them fall out of love, or be unable to feel it, in relationships that were previously great If your girlfriend or boyfriend started taking GLP1s and your relationship started failing, there’s a good chance that’s why

English
142
105
1.8K
307.4K
hash
hash@ded__kat·
Peter Thiel being an anagram for The Reptile is crazy
English
142
1.7K
26.5K
670K

Tuklasin

@m3po22 @ze_rusty @radumpopescu @danfarnsy @cremieuxrecueil @veritasium @BrandonLuuMD @RealFoodRina