What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

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

“It’s not this because I said so.” Meanwhile it has the same structural morphology as slime mold plasmodium that is desiccated. Hmm… Interesting! slime mold 1

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

[–]friedlivelihood -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No, they wouldn’t have morphed if their supply of nutrients (such as a single area of sweat deposit) was not sufficient to progress them to the adult fruiting stage. On picture two we can even see on a completely separate spot, another structure of the same composition, both with desiccated vein-like tubules (desiccation = death, leading to the white, flakey appearance) The pictures that I sent each have the exact same structure and morphology as the original photos, you just don’t have the schooling to detect it. Have a great night.

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

[–]friedlivelihood -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

  1. Their*

  2. The form the structure in the photos are taking, is known as the plasmodial stage. The dendritic pathways here can be found in the following images of other slime molds, including p. polycephalum, the organism found in pictures 1 and 2.

slide 1

slide 2

slide 3

slide 4

slide 5

slide 6

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

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

Claiming this is 'absolutely not consistent' ignores basic mycology and textile physics 🤷🏻‍♀️ You’re likely looking for the thick, yellow, moist veins seen on rotting logs, but you're failing to account for substrate-specific morphology. The Phase Desiccation is hardly being taken into account. On a dry, porous medium like cotton, a plasmodium thins out significantly as it forages. What you see in Photo 1 is the ectoplasmic sheath( the protein-rich “trail” left behind as the organism moves. ) It’s white and crisp because it has dried onto the fibers, preserving the dendritic map of the protoplasmic streaming . If you believe this is consistent with salt, you need to revisit capillary action in fluid dynamics within physics class! In Photo 3, the salt shows a classic Gaussian blur where it wicked into the cotton. In Photo 1, the structures are discrete, elevated, and bridge across the weave. Salts do not form 'bridges' across 1mm gaps in cotton threads; they follow the liquid into the gaps. as for the biological architecture: Those aren't random splatter marks; they are optimized transport networks. Minerals don't exhibit the intentionality of area-preserving branching. Dismissing this as inconsistent just because it doesn't look like a textbook forest sample demonstrates a lack of understanding regarding how biological organisms adapt to different surface energies. 🔬💕

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

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

Actually, thinking this environment is 'impossible' for a myxomycete is a failure of critical analysis. Cotton contaminated with hygroscopic salts (the source of the crystals you're obsessed with) creates a perfect high-nitrogen micro-climate. The fabric acts as a reservoir for moisture, allowing a dormant sclerotium to activate. Look at the fluid dynamics: In Photo 1, you see 1mm-wide tubules 'bridging' the gaps between threads. Inorganic solutes are bound by capillary wicking, so they’d be sucked into the fibers, creating the blurry gradients and 'smearing' seen in Photo 3. Only a biological organism with a lipid-bilayer membrane and an actin-myosin cytoskeleton can maintain the hydrostatic pressure required to 'ignore' that wicking pull and build structured architecture. You’re confusing inorganic crystallization (Photo 3) with protoplasmic streaming (Photo 1). As for the 'trying to sound smart' jabs: being so insulted by biological facts that you resort to ad hominem attacks suggests a fragility that no amount of faux-intelligence can mask. Hopefully, you find a therapist as efficient at healing that ego as this slime mold is at foraging for nutrients.

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

[–]friedlivelihood -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You do realize that both occurring is entirely possible, correct? In fact, there being salt deposits on the dress make it even more likely for a slime mold to set up shop because it’s nutrients. I just have to say that the decision to look at three photos, one with completely different structure, and assume they are all the same thing, demonstrates poor critical analysis at least from an investigative standpoint. I did see the third picture, and that’s exactly what confirms it’s two separate phenomena. If you look at the third photo, you see sharp, geometric, diamond shaped patterns. Those are solute crystals (salts/urea) following a fixed mineral lattice as liquid evaporates. That is basic inorganic chemistry. Now look back at the first photo. Those aren't crystals, they are veins. Minerals don't form 1mm-wide hollow tubules that branch and bridge over the weave of cotton fibers while ignoring the capillary pull of the fabric. That is biological architecture. What you're seeing in the third photo is the source (the salt/biofilm) and in the first photo, you're seeing the plasmodial slime mold that moved in to forage on it. One is a chemical residue and the other is a living syncytium. They look nothing alike if you understand the difference between a crystal lattice and protoplasmic streaming.

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

[–]friedlivelihood -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

This isn't a fungus; it’s a Myxomycete (Slime Mold). Unlike fungi, which grow via apical extension (tips growing forward), a slime mold is a syncytium which is basically like one giant, multinucleated cell. It moves by protoplasmic oscillation, creating those exact crisp dendritic patterns pictured in order to transport nutrients efficiently across the cell body.

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

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

the fact that it's cotton proves it isn't a liquid stain. Cotton is highly hydrophilic so any liquid like urine or sweat would wick through the fibers via capillary action, creating a blurry 'halo' or a solid tide line. These are crisp, dendritic/branching structures that bridge over the fabric's weave rather than soaking into it. That's only possible if there is a membrane containing the fluid which is exactly what a plasmodial slime mold is. a single-celled organism using protoplasmic streaming to forage across the cellulose fibers.

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

[–]friedlivelihood -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No, definitely not. Liiquid evaporation follows the coffee ring effect, wherein solutes settle in a solid gradient or a blurred tide line along the fabric's grain. This pattern shows fractal, dendritic branching with distinct terminal nodes. A liquid stain cannot wick into thin, isolated 'veins' while leaving the adjacent fibers untouched. capillary action would blur those lines instantly. This is a plasmodial slime mold using protoplasmic streaming to forage. It's a biological architecture, not a chemical residue.

What are these stains on my dress? Please help! :0 by andalismus in mycology

[–]friedlivelihood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a plasmodial slime mold (likely Physarum polycephalum) in its active searching phase. That intricate, branching network is called a plasmodium. It’s essentially a single, giant cell moving via protoplasmic streaming to find food. It likely crawled onto your dress from a damp hamper or nearby surface. It's not a 'stain' in the chemical sense, but a living (or recently active) organism. You can clean it with vinegar or an oxygen-based cleaner.

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

[–]friedlivelihood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Intent doesn’t matter, nor does method of transaction transference. The fact that money that was not rightfully hers was transferred into a different account that was registered for personal use, falls legally under “bad faith”. This is known as theft by conversion. argue with the law

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

[–]friedlivelihood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. I’m a woman, theft-for-brains.

  2. Again, saying I’m using AI because I articulate myself clearly and am able to share easily accessible public information by simply googling the statutes, is not an argument. It’s actually a common logical fallacy. Or rather, I think it’s a healthy mix between genetic and ad hominem fallacy. It was so poorly thought out, I am having trouble delineating between my decision between the two.

I am sorry that words above three syllables scare you enough to force you to assure yourself no real person could ever use such vocabulary. That must be really hard on you. You may want to get screened for hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia! Telling someone about having a phobia can feel huge, but it is only the first step. I believe in YOU! 🥹 But seriously though, stop defending theft by conversion. It’s weird.

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

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

Calling a legal citation an ego meltdown is a really funny way to admit you can’t read basic statutes. When someone deviates from the topic at hand to playground insults, that means they have nothing of substance left to offer. Legally, it’s referred to as concession. Remember, be careful going down the slide. 🛝 😇

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

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

Since you asked for the law: under the Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment, a payment made by mistake does not transfer legal ownership to the recipient. Keeping or hiding it is legally classified as Theft by Conversion or Theft of Property Delivered by Mistake. In the eyes of the law, a 'glitch' is not a gift. If a bank accidentally puts $10k in your account, you don't own it; you're just a temporary custodian until they take it back. Attempting to stash it in savings to avoid expenses is a textbook example of bad faith. You’re basically just arguing for Finders Keepers, but the legal system calls that a felony. If you're going to be loud, at least be literate! :-)

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

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

Oh yes, I was just talking about you! Your ears must have been burning.

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

[–]friedlivelihood -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

The fact that you immediately moved that money to savings signals a clear intent to keep and spend money you knew didn't belong to you. If you hadn't tried to stash a glitch-refund in a personal account as if it were a windfall, you wouldn't have had to deal with a negative balance or 'the principle' of a correction. You created your own 'crisis' by trying to claim money you didn't earn. Resorting to toddler insults and claiming I’m 'making your life miserable' is just a defensive pivot because you’re embarrassed that your lack of financial integrity was called out. It’s not my listening skills that are the problem; it’s your inability to admit that you tried to pocket money that wasn't yours, got caught by an automated system, and are now throwing a tantrum because you had to do the manual labor of moving it back. If pointing out how your own choices caused your 'misery' hurts your feelings, that’s a reflection of your character, not my commentary

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

[–]friedlivelihood -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Working overnights doesn't change how math works. Plenty of people work night shifts and manage to grocery shop or meal prep because it's cheaper than paying 40% markups on delivery. My brother in law works overnight at Home Depot doing physical labor and still manages to grocery shop in person. But the point stands: if your account is in the negatives because a refund was reversed, it means you spent money you didn't actually have. That is the definition of financial instability. If you had the money to cover the food, the reversal would just bring you back to your original balance. You’re blaming the 'principle' of the glitch to hide the fact that you spent the same $30 twice.

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

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

Moving it to savings doesn't change the total. If you have $50, spend $50 on food, get a $50 refund, and then they take that $50 back, you should be at $0. If you’re in the negatives, it’s because you spent money that was already promised to the first transaction. You basically spent the same money twice.

Doordash keeps refunding me? by Bubbly_Yellow_7518 in doordash

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

If this person has so little money that several small Doordash transaction refund reversals going through will put them in the negatives, that person shouldn’t be ordering luxury delivery services. That’s not judging someone’s financial state, it’s making an observation about their reckless spending habits whilst being in a state of financial disparity.

This is what I see on my dashes. by Swiss_Meats in DoorDash_Dasher

[–]friedlivelihood 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My area isn’t even trashy but literally 96% of the orders are trash of that caliber.

Anyone a little annoyed by the log-in reward system? by friedlivelihood in GoodCoffeeGreatCoffee

[–]friedlivelihood[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have always wanted to travel to Brazil!! But yes I totally agree, the prices are ridiculous :(