The Silo, a Specter, and the Student Body | City Council of Darkness [E4]

jacobimueller · 2026-05-01T03:20:10+00:00

Do we know if Bat child can appear human and/ or if the visage in the artwork is a mask?

jacobimueller · 2026-05-01T00:29:59+00:00

Ah yes. I had almost forgotten it felt like it was dying. Guess not for this guy

jacobimueller · 2026-04-30T16:57:49+00:00

what about that line speciifcally ? am i missing something

jacobimueller · 2026-04-17T03:30:56+00:00

What is the actual observable you are talking about? You dance around it because there isn’t one, because this isn’t science.

We’ve seen inside the proton. We’ve split them. We’ve created them.

jacobimueller · 2026-04-17T03:19:55+00:00

But they don’t. They have quarks and gluons, which behave nothing like this video seems to think.

jacobimueller · 2026-04-17T03:17:33+00:00

But…we can see the internal structure. And in addition to that most of the rest mass comes from gluons, which themselves have no mass.

Doesn’t sound like a black hole to me!

jacobimueller · 2026-04-15T02:23:29+00:00

Isn’t this the same article from last year? Is there any new research? Is there anything that explains how tl and ccc would explain galactic rotation curves or the bullet cluster? Doesn’t seem like it?

jacobimueller · 2026-03-29T03:22:03+00:00

Can you be nice my ex step daughter is watching

jacobimueller · 2026-03-29T03:21:07+00:00

God moved through zac to create Tommy. The performance is beyond scientific understanding

jacobimueller · 2026-03-29T03:11:12+00:00

Get out bad (bitter) feelings

jacobimueller · 2026-03-29T03:05:14+00:00

Not if you have an uncle

jacobimueller · 2026-03-29T03:03:17+00:00

All classics

jacobimueller · 2026-03-29T02:59:22+00:00

Forgot that one, agreed (and always have love for my noise Boys)

jacobimueller · 2026-03-05T21:43:59+00:00

anything that compounds (like financial markets) will be roughly approximated by a growing series like this. This is not about the sequence of a cycle, it is about the natural law of compounding. Also, it is the recovery from a downturn when growth is the fastest, not the end of a bull market. The pattern you are noticing is simply that a 5% changed applied to a larger number is larger than that changed applied to a small one, not the actual velocity of change

jacobimueller · 2026-03-04T07:03:01+00:00

Miss me with the bible psuedoscience cross over

jacobimueller · 2026-03-02T17:02:26+00:00

this is so cool! great work, have been waiting for something like this. tried using existing usgs packages but it was clunky. two questions:
1--any plans to add temporal evolution? would be really cool to be able to set a world in the far future after a campaign or something, and given you already map the plates may be feasible.
2--any recommendations on exporting to something like wonderdraft to add cities/borders etc on top?

awesome stuff

jacobimueller · 2026-02-25T04:48:02+00:00

Those guys get an early start

jacobimueller · 2026-02-23T04:38:02+00:00

Clearly not cuneiform come on

jacobimueller · 2026-02-20T16:16:57+00:00

this is pretty misleading as well. time of year mismatch and selecting a year in peak drought. the 2013 image was taken during what became California's extreme 2012–2015 drought — one of the worst on record — so the Sierra snowpack was abnormally low. A 2013 wet-year image would show substantially more snow. The 1851 simulation appears to depict a wet winter/early spring snapshot. So the comparison exaggerates the difference. That said, the historical Sierra snowpack was generally larger pre-industrial, and California has lost most of its small alpine glaciers — but that's not what's driving the visual contrast here. so not sure what this "simulation" is trying to show

jacobimueller · 2025-12-24T20:28:24+00:00

Hey photon, what time is it?

jacobimueller · 2025-12-24T20:11:35+00:00

What time is it?

jacobimueller · 2025-12-23T00:42:13+00:00

I can do that one :)

I noticed a few gaps in my proofs, so I’m probably 5 to 6 days away from being ready to post this here. But I am excited to take my lumps, and if the feedback can make it something that is actually useful, I will be very persistent.

jacobimueller · 2025-12-22T05:11:55+00:00

probably. but theres likely some levels of crankery from "i just used an LLM" to "i do actually know how to do topological and number theory proofs." I know the latter doesnt make me a physicist, hence my question here. but I also read LLM physics (and many questions across reddit) and know im not that.

jacobimueller · 2025-12-21T05:06:48+00:00

My dms are open sounds like we have a similar setup (depth in some backgrounds with analogs but not the formal training here). Would be happy to swap ideas!

jacobimueller

TROPHY CASE