Abilities Considered Unnatural

1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
max1461
raginrayguns

The Hager biography of Linus Pauling:

Pauling was not the only sought-after young professor. Another was J. Robert Oppenheimer, the young American physicist Pauling had met in Munich. In 1928, Millikan talked Oppenheimer into teaching physics for part of the year at Caltech, the remaining time to be spent at Berkeley, much like Pauling's new deal.

Oppenheimer made an immediate impression in Pasadena. Thin, almost frail in appearance, with strikingly large, wide-set eyes and a head of thick, dark hair, he was attractive as well as brilliant. Although raised in New York, he seemed exotically European, Bohemian, poetic, chain-smoking, prone to exotic literary and philosophical references. His only shortcoming seemed to be that he was a dismal lecturer, mumbling, scattering cigarette ashes, talking over the heads of his listeners, and packing the blackboard with cramped, barely readable equations. Despite that, he soon attracted a devoted band of acolytes, some of the West Coast's finest students, who were able to cut through the obscurity to the essentials of the new physics and who began following him on his annual trek between Pasadena and Berkeley. He was pursued, too, by scandalous rumors (which he seemed disinclined to squelch), hints of free love—perhaps homosexuality—and radical politics.

Pauling and Ava Helen found him witty, attractive, and a welcome antidote to the deadly dullness of most Caltech faculty members. They were all the same age, all young and brilliant, and all on the way up. The Paulings and the young physicist quickly became close friends. They shared dinners and jokes, talked about European physics, and gossiped about Caltech and Berkeley professors. Oppenheimer came to Pauling for advice on how to become a better lecturer, and Pauling sought him out to talk about quantum mechanics. The two of them began to consider mounting a joint attack on the chemical bond, with Oppenheimer working on the mathematics and Pauling providing the chemical insights.

Perhaps they became too close too fast. Something began to seem odd to Pauling. Oppenheimer not only adopted some of Pauling's lecturing style; he began wearing an old fedora around campus, much like one that Pauling wore. He started to give Pauling gifts, sometimes little ones, a favorite ring on one occasion, and on another, a magnificently extravagant one, Oppenheimer's large boyhood mineral collection, the crystal treasury that had first spurred Oppenheimer's interest in science, a thousand fine specimens, including some fine calcites in which Pauling took special interest. Then there were the poems Oppenheimer gave Pauling, verse that Pauling found both obscure and. troubling, mixing classical allusions with lines about mineralogy, Dante, and pederasty. Pauling had never had a friendship like this.

Neither had Ava Helen. She enjoyed Oppenheimer enormously, took pleasure in talking with him and flirting a little with him, as she did with almost everybody on social occasions. Perhaps she flirted a little more than usual, for Oppenheimer was unusually intriguing. Perhaps he felt her interest went beyond a casual friendship. It all went a little too far, in any case, when Oppenheimer approached her one day in 1929 when Pauling was at work and proffered a clumsy invitation to join him on a tryst in Mexico. Surprised and flattered, Ava Helen told him no, of course not, she was married and took it seriously. That night, she reported the whole thing to Pauling. "I think she was somewhat pleased with herself as a femme fatale," Pauling said. Perhaps she was a little too pleased. Pauling cut off his relationship with Oppenheimer, ending any chance of collaboration on the chemical bond and initiating a coolness between the two men that would last the rest of their lives.

Years later, Ava Helen told her husband, "You know, I don't think Oppenheimer was in love with me. I think he was in love with you." After mulling it over, Pauling concluded that she might be right.

raginrayguns

@vaniver said:

I wish this had been in the movie

there's not enough gay shit in any of these movies. John Nash can lose his job for gay cruising and, while we don't know if the allegations were true, it's not in the movie. They did Alan Turing–Alan Turing!–with all the gay shit offscreen, with a romancelike arc that invovles him proposing marriage and developing a deep bond with a woman, with his homosexuality as just like, a facet of his relationship with this woman rather than involving any other onscreen man. I don't know how gay you have to be for it to show up in a scientist biopic.

raginrayguns

I have not seen and will not see Oppenheimer

Wake me up for science yaoi

gay AND european apparently

Okay to be fair the same thing that makes people go “guy who’s going to get us to space? Elon Musk!” is probably the same bullshit that makes them go “Maori guy in showbiz? Taika Waititi!”.

At least when I pick the token asian dude in the last American movie I saw for facecasting or a coom I recognise there’s a fuckton more out there somewhere if I actually bothered to watch foreign live action.

shieldfoss
brazenautomaton

so disappointing, but not unexpected, that the Barbie movie is about how men are bad (as I understand the plot, which seems pretty clear to me, about Ken importing patriarchy to Barbieland)

same for the fact that people are praising it for saying that men are bad. disappointing, not surprising.

because first off, your patriarchy theory is wrong, the world does not work like that, when you write characters in accordance with patriarchy theory their actions immediately stop making sense

Second off and more importantly, if your movie about Barbie is about how Ken tries to bring the patriarchy to Barbieland and Barbie has to defeat it, your movie is not about Barbie. Your movie is about the patriarchy, which Barbie is not about. Barbie’s nemesis is not the patriarchy. Barbie is not defined by her opposition to something and she is not defined by how she breaks through barriers placed on her because Barbie doesn’t have any barriers. Barbie does what Barbie does and accomplishes what she accomplishes, and the idea that something could even be trying to hold her back never comes up because it’s inconceivable. You were correct in identifying Barbieland doesn’t have your conception of patriarchy and forgot that it meant that your concept of patriarchy cannot coexist with Barbie without massively devaluing her by just making her suck. 

Barbie isn’t someone who had to fight through the patriarchy to be seen as good enough to be an astronaut even though she’s a woman. Barbie’s a fucking astronaut because she’s fucking Barbie of course she’s good enough to be an astronaut. She’s defined by her own accomplishments. The Kens can’t decide to all just subjugate them because that doesn’t make any fucking sense. Are these Barbies, these astronauts and pet doctors and Senators, just so weak and frail and victimized that all it takes to subjugate them is a man deciding to subjugate them? Where’s their fucking girl power? Does girl power only exist until a man, any man, decides to oppose it?

Once again, nobody thinks less of women than feminists.

abilitiesconsideredunnatural

Have not seen the movie yet but it would fit the trend in Shitty Modern Corporate Remakes where no one has the balls to show women in power without giving them a man to overcome.

If there’s true leftist sentiment in any of these hacks I’m calling their problem an extension of the “oh shit, what if we actually get the power to unfuck society and it’s our problem?” disease. They can’t actually imagine a future where the president or emperor or head of faculty is a woman, you have to give your female characters patriarchy to fight instead of… all the other problems that characters in a sausage fest in the bad old days could have. Doesn’t help that if you have women in power being normal, at some point they’re gonna fight each other – these people don’t know how to write women fighting about something without it being a catfight over a guy, and don’t know how to have them working together without it being Girl Power.

Cringe 14-year-old half-SJW me could imagine Hari Seldon a woman. But then cringe 14-year-old me knew that at least Asian/Jewish/Slavic women could be mathematicians, and that’ beyond the capacity of people who claim to have read all the old stuff and be inspired to make something new and better.

A good writer could even handle a cast where female characters are idiots who rush headlong into violence and get their power by nepotism and psychic ability instead of merit, but the average horndog on Tumblr or 4chan can use their free hand to write about the adventures of meathead muscle mommy better than the people paid by Apple TV.

i am technically a feminist and all but i'm not with those guys and they don't like me either gendpol see also foregrounding black people in everything and making them incompetent assholes you want us to root for
caesarsaladinn
shieldfoss

Love a Net Zero Info post but in fact you can see some oceans meet even if the photos supplied in that post were of something else.

This:

image

is the interface between Skagerrak* and Kattegat** where they meet north of Skagen, Jutland.

The picture does not quite do justice to reality - when you're there in person, the wavefront where the two waters meet is more obvious (Or - can be. I'm sure there are still days, but I've been there in person and it was more visible to me that there were two waters meeting)

*The eastern-most part of the North Sea
** Western-most part of the Baltic Sea

businesstiramisu

yeah i was gonna say, it’s a shame that the pictures were wrong in that viral post b/c there really are important differences in bodies of water. Like, salinity, temperature, circulatory currents, idk it’s been a long time since I studied oceanography but it really does matter a lot if you do things related to the ocean. Whether that aligns best with “7 oceans” traditionally taught seems like a more fraught question, but lumping it under “all the salt water is connected so it’s really one ocean” seems to me like abstracting away some very important information to understanding how oceans work on this planet.

shieldfoss
wizardcore420

image
elmyra-is-tired

you know the wizards council will use this to expand the surveillance kingdom and erode nonhuman rights

wizardcore420

👏dragon 👏blood 👏can’t 👏erode 👏mythril 👏beams

theboynichmanuscript

image
wizardcore420

everyone else is funnier than me I quit

friendly-eldritch-goddess

not to nerd about this (I'm about to nerd about this) BUT,

in any wizarding world they would not have a hexagonal building. especially one of that importance. the reason for this is that a hexagon is periodic monotile. this means you could magically duplicate the building and tessellate it, covering the area in copies of the building so that nobody could figure out which one is the original.


to put less technical terms on it, y'know those little shapes that everyone played with as kids? with the yellow hexagons?

image

these things. do you remember putting the hexagons together? they fit together perfectly

image

here's an example of hexagons fitting together. Imagine that each of these is a magical copy of a government building, with only one of them being the original one that people would want to work in. maybe that is the only one with the files in it. that would suck.

image

a pentagon does not tile like this. if you have ever tried to put a bunch of pentagons together you will find that gaps are formed which can't be filled by other pentagons (this assumes that we are using only regular pentagons, meaning all sides are the same length and all angles are the same size). you would end up with something that looks a bit like the above image. note the black gaps in the structure. perhaps this is why the pentagon (the government building) is shaped like that.

so what would the people of the wizarding government do in order to prevent this? they certainly wouldn't build a hexagon, and they would also avoid other monotiles (shapes that can cover a space with no gaps). a pentagon would work well for this as shown above, but if we are going with the assumption that all things would change slightly from the world we live in (and the 9/11 that happened here), I recommend a heptagon, as it is the regular polygon with the least number of sides (other than a pentagon) that does not tessellate, as shown below.

image
image

as a bonus, here is a page from the book savage shapes, part of the series murderous maths. this features the exact scenario I mentioned, though this was done by aliens rather than through ordinary magic. a huge thank you to murderous maths for kickstarting my love of mathematics and also being so goofy (in all the best ways)

shieldfoss

You forgot to mention why a building in a tiling shape would be bad though.

squareallworthy

You: No one can tile a regular heptagon, even with magic.

Me: *casts Tenser's Hyperbolic Space Transform*

image
max1461
max1461

I'm not a liberal! I said I like many liberal ideas. Because I do! But I'm not a liberal because I'm not an anything. Well I mean sometimes I say I'm this or that for convenience, but, you know, in reality I'm just a hashtag freethinking individual. Well anyway. But before you (various tumblr tankies other than my mutuals, my mutuals are the exception to all rules) start telling me oh liberalism doesn't work because of this or that, check perhaps which liberal ideas are the ones that I like. Etc.

abilitiesconsideredunnatural

*notes you down with label “wanker who avoids labels”* Are you sure you’re not an anarchist at this rate?