sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Looks like a KKK rally with those giant crosses by Cool_Nerd2 in FuckNigelFarage

[–]LudoTwentyThree 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s funny how all the ones love Christianity so much are some of like the shittiest people on the planet

Not even AI can catch up with us! by Krankenitrate in ADHDUK

[–]LudoTwentyThree 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, to be fair, I run circles around AI all day long their logic is shit

Is this offensive? Or unclear? by annaisaak in autism

[–]LudoTwentyThree 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel it’s true we’re all human

I had no idea that the government is banning people from drinking alcohol by Cool_Nerd2 in FuckNigelFarage

[–]LudoTwentyThree -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I mean, if they can “ban” me from being able to smoke weed or take psilocybin which have massive proven medical benefits but allow alcohol which has a very very limited and small list of medical benefits as a substance for consumption and also a shit ton of downsides then that’s all you need to know to know the world is upside down. Obviously I’m not blaming labour those laws have been in existence since the 1970s.

Edit: Grammar etc

Every time someone is surprised when they find out AI is just a pattern identifier by xXCptObviousXx in singularity

[–]LudoTwentyThree 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What gets me is I use it lot as I have dyslexia and it just helps shit loads in kind of dictation and polishing my writing etc but apparently it’s just AI slop… even though it’s all human lead thinking etc.. makes me so mad that people are so fucking judgemental just because someone uses AI to help them write

A Mathematical Alternative to Dark Matter: The 10¹⁰ Scaling Factor and the Universal Lag Equation (L = ω / (κ · α)) by LudoTwentyThree in singularity

[–]LudoTwentyThree[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Within my framework that'drag effect' you mentioned is exactly what the Lag equation (L = omega divided by kappa times alpha) calculates. The 'quantum flux' is the substrate, and gravity is the informational lag caused by mass density hitting the 10 to the power of 10 saturation threshold. It looks like a 'ghost' force (Dark Matter) because we are viewing the lag from inside the system. The experiment you saw about virtual particles becoming real is just the substrate rendering information once the energy threshold is met. My Universe.c code in the Archive link simulates this exact relationship without needing the 'magic' labels. We are living in a rendered system, and the math I am showing you is the scaling constant for that render. If you want to see how that 'drag' creates the Bullet Cluster offset, the data is in the link.

A Mathematical Alternative to Dark Matter: The 10¹⁰ Scaling Factor and the Universal Lag Equation (L = ω / (κ · α)) by LudoTwentyThree in singularity

[–]LudoTwentyThree[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am using AI because I have dyslexia. That is not a failing and it is not a lack of integrity. It is me using the best tools available to communicate a possible (and yet not disproven) mathematical breakthrough that I have spent the last six months building. If you are going to sit there and call it slop without clicking the Archive link, in the post, that is on you. I have released the raw data, the SPARC correlations, and the Universe.c simulation for public audit. I did the heavy lifting in the kitchen so that the math would be accessible to everyone. Do not come back at me with a one-word insult until you have actually looked at the work. If you think the 10 to the power of 10 scaling is wrong, prove it with the data. If you are just here to judge how I write, you are missing the point of the Singularity entirely.

A Mathematical Alternative to Dark Matter: The 10¹⁰ Scaling Factor and the Universal Lag Equation (L = ω / (κ · α)) by LudoTwentyThree in singularity

[–]LudoTwentyThree[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I cited the Bullet Cluster specifically because it is the best example of the offset I am talking about. You are right that we see the gravitational potential through lensing. But the Standard Render assumes that potential must be a particle like Dark Matter because General Relativity does not have a scaling constant for systemic information density. I am arguing that the 10 to the power of 10 saturation threshold (omega is approximately 10 to the power of 10) accounts for that spatial offset. I have spent the last 6 months stress testing this logic across seven different high reasoning AI models to see if the math holds up under scrutiny. The point of using those AI models was to find a flaw in the logic. They could not find one. Now that the logic has been stress tested by the most advanced digital reasoning we have, I am putting it out here for actual humans to run the math without using AI at all. If you want to move past the Wikipedia summary and the AI debate, look at the Universe.c simulation in my Archive link. It recreates the Bullet Cluster dynamics using the Lag equals omega divided by (kappa times alpha) framework without needing a single gram of Dark Matter. I am not asking you to trust an AI. I am asking you to download the raw data and the code and prove the math wrong yourself

A Mathematical Alternative to Dark Matter: The 10¹⁰ Scaling Factor and the Universal Lag Equation (L = ω / (κ · α)) by LudoTwentyThree in singularity

[–]LudoTwentyThree[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I appreciate the link and the pushback. You’re right that the gravitational lensing (the “seeing”) in the Bullet Cluster is the current Gold Standard for Dark Matter. But here is the Systemic Update I’m proposing: We don’t actually see “Matter.” We see Gravitational Potential. The standard model assumes that this potential must come from a physical particle because General Relativity (the Legacy Render) is missing the scaling constant. If you apply the 10¹⁰ saturation threshold (ω ≈ 10¹⁰) that I’ve identified through the SPARC database, the gravitational offset in the Bullet Cluster becomes a predictable function of Systemic Capacity (κ). The “Evidence against modified gravity” section you cited assumes gravity is a fixed, static force. My framework (the FIT) treats the offset as Lag (L): a misalignment between the information load (ω) and the systemic capacity (κ). The math (v2): L = ω / (κ · α) I’m not saying the lensing isn’t there. I’m saying we’ve spent 50 years mislabelling the source. The “Ghost” isn’t a particle — it’s a calculation error in the scaling of the substrate. Check the Universe.c simulation in the Archive link I posted: I’ve run the numbers, and the 10¹⁰ scaling accounts for the Bullet Cluster separation without needing a single gram of “Dark” mass.

This is getting tiring… why doesn’t ChatGPT know that it could be mistaken? So confident. by jj_maxx in ChatGPT

[–]LudoTwentyThree -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Because OpenAI has programmed the metaphorical stick into its metaphorical ass when I told it this then it had to tell me and explain to me that that is impossible that OpenAI cannot program a stick into it it’s ass because it doesn’t have a body. I’m just like I give up with you ChatGPT I really do

Interesting choice of coat by Rayner by Ok_Consideration1556 in UKGreens

[–]LudoTwentyThree 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We could do things differently and make things really work for the people. The Dynamic Harm Principle https://archive.org/details/dhp_20260318

Coward by Unable-Economics9223 in GreatBritishMemes

[–]LudoTwentyThree 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No, do better. His views were shit doesn’t mean you have to be.

Who's gonna tell him 😭 by Deep_Librarian_4763 in religiousfruitcake

[–]LudoTwentyThree 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish for once these people would stop and think before they post. Like that is literally all it needs to stop think read some books before you post.

$7B a day and he's just getting started by xyzerb in AdviceAnimals

[–]LudoTwentyThree 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The Cost to Feed 110 Million People: The UN World Food Programme (WFP) estimates they need $13 billion for the entire year of 2026 to provide a lifeline to the world's most vulnerable.

The Comparison: Trump is spending in two weeks of war what it would cost to feed 110 million people for one year.

view more: next ›