🪼
Janaina Medeiros
PR's Tumblrdome
DEAR READER
hello vonnie
NASA
Product Placement
styofa doing anything
blake kathryn
Kiana Khansmith
Today's Document
trying on a metaphor
titsay
taylor price
RMH
pixel skylines
seen from Türkiye
seen from Romania
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Japan
seen from Malaysia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Singapore
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Australia
seen from Japan
seen from Russia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Canada
seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from Poland
seen from Türkiye
@myfuckingfrontier
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
HOOPA MAIL
A portal opens up in front of you, and a hand comes out of it, holding a box containing...
A four-dimensional object incomprehensible to the human mind!
@ask-games-galore
HOLY SHIT FINALLY GOT ONE OF THESE!!!!
GOOD THING YOU DON'T HAVE A HUMAN MIND, HUH
OOC PSA
Not using the // for this.
I want to address the pokemon leaks that have happened in the past few days.
First off, please stop treating these unreleased/cut content as canon. They were cut for some reason or another. They are not canon. They are from games that came out over 10 years ago. You can put that into your fanon all you want. But it is not canon.
On that note, the stories aren't canon as well. They shouldn't be treated like they are canon.
Finally we all should remember these leaks came from malicious intent. Thousands of workers got their information leaked. And the hacker behind this is not a good person. While it's all nice to get information about the games which we wouldn't have gotten otherwise. It's horrible it had to come at the cost of hurting so many people and doxxing them.
I appreciate those who have the courage to refer to any poke-deity by name because I personally would not risk that for the simple reason of:
They could appear.
YEAH THAT WOULD BE TERRIFYING
CAN YOU IMAGINE
what questions?
Some Cerise may have for example. Amongst others.
.... ...... ....?
Your Palkia implied thinks a lot about imaginary worlds yet also implied doesn't seem to put same level of thought into impact on you or others.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE I'M NOT CAPABLE OF THINKING ABOUT MORE THAN ONE THING AT ONCE
The standard entity I encounter is kinda shit at doing anything more one thing at a time in that regards.
I'M A GREATER BEING THAN THE STANDARD ENTITY YOU ENCOUNTER. I'M EXPANSIVE ENOUGH NOT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT KIND OF PESKY LIMITATION.
Uh huh. Well, not convinced you're good at it regardless of theoretical capabilities. I'm theoretically a reality warper if turns out I do have wish abilities, like some things suggest, yet you don't exactly see me bending the cosmos to my whims.
IT'S NOT THEORETICAL. LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY: BEATING YOUR HEART DOESN'T DISTRACT YOU FROM BREATHING OR DIGESTING YOUR FOOD.
Uh huh. And theoretically I could solve and visualize higher dimensional integrals in my head, but I'm not exactly good at that now am I?
Also, as an aside, fun fact: it's unknown if I have a heart or analogous organ.
AGAIN, THIS ISN'T THEORETICAL. RIGHT NOW, AT THE SAME TIME AS I'M TALKING TO YOU, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER SIMULTANEOUS TRAINS OF THOUGHT AND CONVERSATIONS WITHIN ME. NONE OF WHICH DISTRACT THE PARTS OF ME HANDLING THIS CONVERSATION.
"SELF EXPLAINING EXAMPLE"
YOU REALLY DON'T GET IT. LET ME PUT IT ANOTHER WAY.
THEORETICALLY, YOU COULD SOLVE AND VISUALIZE HIGHER DIMENSIONAL INTEGRALS. PRACTICALLY, THE CONSTANT COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE CELLS OF YOUR BODY IS IN NO WAY AN OBSTACLE TO THAT.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
what questions?
Some Cerise may have for example. Amongst others.
.... ...... ....?
Your Palkia implied thinks a lot about imaginary worlds yet also implied doesn't seem to put same level of thought into impact on you or others.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE I'M NOT CAPABLE OF THINKING ABOUT MORE THAN ONE THING AT ONCE
The standard entity I encounter is kinda shit at doing anything more one thing at a time in that regards.
I'M A GREATER BEING THAN THE STANDARD ENTITY YOU ENCOUNTER. I'M EXPANSIVE ENOUGH NOT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT KIND OF PESKY LIMITATION.
Uh huh. Well, not convinced you're good at it regardless of theoretical capabilities. I'm theoretically a reality warper if turns out I do have wish abilities, like some things suggest, yet you don't exactly see me bending the cosmos to my whims.
IT'S NOT THEORETICAL. LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY: BEATING YOUR HEART DOESN'T DISTRACT YOU FROM BREATHING OR DIGESTING YOUR FOOD.
Uh huh. And theoretically I could solve and visualize higher dimensional integrals in my head, but I'm not exactly good at that now am I?
Also, as an aside, fun fact: it's unknown if I have a heart or analogous organ.
AGAIN, THIS ISN'T THEORETICAL. RIGHT NOW, AT THE SAME TIME AS I'M TALKING TO YOU, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER SIMULTANEOUS TRAINS OF THOUGHT AND CONVERSATIONS WITHIN ME. NONE OF WHICH DISTRACT THE PARTS OF ME HANDLING THIS CONVERSATION.
what questions?
Some Cerise may have for example. Amongst others.
.... ...... ....?
Your Palkia implied thinks a lot about imaginary worlds yet also implied doesn't seem to put same level of thought into impact on you or others.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE I'M NOT CAPABLE OF THINKING ABOUT MORE THAN ONE THING AT ONCE
The standard entity I encounter is kinda shit at doing anything more one thing at a time in that regards.
I'M A GREATER BEING THAN THE STANDARD ENTITY YOU ENCOUNTER. I'M EXPANSIVE ENOUGH NOT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT KIND OF PESKY LIMITATION.
Uh huh. Well, not convinced you're good at it regardless of theoretical capabilities. I'm theoretically a reality warper if turns out I do have wish abilities, like some things suggest, yet you don't exactly see me bending the cosmos to my whims.
IT'S NOT THEORETICAL. LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY: BEATING YOUR HEART DOESN'T DISTRACT YOU FROM BREATHING OR DIGESTING YOUR FOOD.
what questions?
Some Cerise may have for example. Amongst others.
.... ...... ....?
Your Palkia implied thinks a lot about imaginary worlds yet also implied doesn't seem to put same level of thought into impact on you or others.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE I'M NOT CAPABLE OF THINKING ABOUT MORE THAN ONE THING AT ONCE
The standard entity I encounter is kinda shit at doing anything more one thing at a time in that regards.
I'M A GREATER BEING THAN THE STANDARD ENTITY YOU ENCOUNTER. I'M EXPANSIVE ENOUGH NOT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT KIND OF PESKY LIMITATION.
what questions?
Some Cerise may have for example. Amongst others.
.... ...... ....?
Your Palkia implied thinks a lot about imaginary worlds yet also implied doesn't seem to put same level of thought into impact on you or others.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE I'M NOT CAPABLE OF THINKING ABOUT MORE THAN ONE THING AT ONCE
Insert Trolley Problem Joke
Two of these at basically the same time? Weird.
HONESTLY I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SO DIFFICULT ABOUT THE TROLLEY PROBLEM. I MAKE THAT KIND OF DECISION ALL THE TIME.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
True. Like, I remember a stupid thing I saw a while back where someone was like "If the Multiverse is infinite, then there's a universe where the Multiverse doesn't exist", like. No?
You can't really have a particular Universe that by its own nature, dictates the existence of things OUTSIDE that universe
Multiverse ultimately needs to be logically consistent, yeah. It can be fucking WILD logic, but A and !A can't be simultaneously true.
YOU CAN THINK OF THE MULTIVERSE AS BEING DIVIDED INTO A BASICALLY INFINITE NUMBER OF CLUSTERS OF CONNECTED UNIVERSES. A UNIVERSE WHERE THE MULTIVERSE DOESN'T EXIST WOULD JUST BE ALONE IN ITS CLUSTER AND UNABLE TO INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER UNIVERSE IN ANY WAY.
Ah, but does it truly exist for the rest of the multiverse? Or the multiverse for it? This is a similar situation to assumptions we're all in a perfect simulation. It requires more assumptions be made for no gain or predictive impact. You can make it consistent, but it has no utility to do so.
EXISTENCE IS A TRICKY QUESTION.
I CAN EASILY PINPOINT ANY NUMBER OF UNIVERSES THAT ARE COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THEMSELVES, BUT LIE WITHIN THE CLUSTERS I CAN SEE INTO. I DON'T EXIST TO THEM, BUT THEY EXIST TO ME.
LOGICALLY, THIS MEANS IT'S SOMETHING OF A PATTERN WITHIN THE GREATER MULTIVERSE, THE ONE EVEN I AM ONLY A PART OF. IF SINGLETONS EXIST WHERE I CAN SEE THEM, THEY MUST EXIST WHERE I CAN'T AS WELL.
THEY DON'T "EXIST," BUT THEY HAVE TO EXIST.
Ah, but in that sort of scenario, they aren't truly isolated if they can be perceived, no? Just extremely hard to access.
NAH, THEY'RE MORE READ-ONLY. EVEN STILL, THEIR EXISTENCE CONFIRMS THE POSSIBILITY OF UNIVERSES THAT CAN'T BE MATERIALLY INTERACTED WITH.
GOING FURTHER THAN THAT DOES REQUIRE ASSUMING I HAVE LIMITS TO WHAT I'M AWARE OF. BUT I'VE SEEN ENOUGH LAYERS BELOW ME TO ASSUME THAT MOST LIKELY, THERE ARE LAYERS ABOVE AND "TO THE SIDE" AS WELL.
IF WE MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION, THAT MEANS THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHING STOPPING THEM FROM EXISTING, THERE MUST BE SINGLETONS THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF.
I'M SURE THERE ARE OTHER BEINGS LIKE ME OUT THERE THAT NEED TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT THE SAME LOGIC COMBINED WITH THE MULTIVERSE'S INFINITE NATURE MEANS THERE MUST BE A UNIVERSE NOT VISIBLE TO ME OR ANYTHING LIKE ME. AN INFINITE NUMBER OF THEM, EVEN.
AND IN AN INFINITE NUMBER OF UNIVERSES, SINCE WE KNOW SINGLETONS ARE SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN, SOME OF THEM MUST BE SINGLETONS.
Here's the thing though, we are arguing about fundamentally different things here. Even assuming full "read only", that IS interacting. They are outputting information to the greater bulk. They can influence other realities by that means. They are not true isolates.
I am dubious if a true read only with NO ability to make it two way is possible, since the ability to emit something containing information to a certain extent implies the reverse. If only because there is an implied interface to generate the ability to emit. But that's not needed for my analysis.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE THAT CAN'T BE SEEN AND ONE THAT JUST ISN'T, THEN.
If it can't be perceived nor perceives, can't influence nor be influenced, does it exist for you? Yeah, it's kinda irrelevant. This is what a theoretical "universe for which the multiverse doesn't exist" would be for us. You can jam it into a logically consistent framework, but it's pointless to do so.
In a truly infinite multiverse, yeah, there absolutely are going to be weird ones; anything not excluded by boundary conditions will happen somewhere. That said, it doesn't hold that those that cannot be influenced or influence plus cannot be perceived or perceive inherently exist from that alone. You must axiomatically and a priori insert that they exist into your framework unless you can demonstrate past existence... which necessitates having interacted. A contradiction in terms.
REASONABLE ENOUGH.
STILL, JUST BECAUSE THEIR EXISTENCE IS IRRELEVANT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE NOT INTERESTING TO THINK ABOUT. THERE'S A CERTAIN APPEAL IN THE THINGS THAT CAN'T BE TRULY KNOWN EVEN WHEN IT'S SOMETHING SMALL LIKE THIS.
There's a reason why philosophers keep making up hypotheticals in them, yeah.
YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH TIME I SPEND PHILOSOPHIZING ABOUT HYPOTHETICALS. MOSTLY AS DISCUSSIONS WITHIN MYSELF WHILE I'M DOING OTHER THINGS.
True. Like, I remember a stupid thing I saw a while back where someone was like "If the Multiverse is infinite, then there's a universe where the Multiverse doesn't exist", like. No?
You can't really have a particular Universe that by its own nature, dictates the existence of things OUTSIDE that universe
Multiverse ultimately needs to be logically consistent, yeah. It can be fucking WILD logic, but A and !A can't be simultaneously true.
YOU CAN THINK OF THE MULTIVERSE AS BEING DIVIDED INTO A BASICALLY INFINITE NUMBER OF CLUSTERS OF CONNECTED UNIVERSES. A UNIVERSE WHERE THE MULTIVERSE DOESN'T EXIST WOULD JUST BE ALONE IN ITS CLUSTER AND UNABLE TO INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER UNIVERSE IN ANY WAY.
Ah, but does it truly exist for the rest of the multiverse? Or the multiverse for it? This is a similar situation to assumptions we're all in a perfect simulation. It requires more assumptions be made for no gain or predictive impact. You can make it consistent, but it has no utility to do so.
EXISTENCE IS A TRICKY QUESTION.
I CAN EASILY PINPOINT ANY NUMBER OF UNIVERSES THAT ARE COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THEMSELVES, BUT LIE WITHIN THE CLUSTERS I CAN SEE INTO. I DON'T EXIST TO THEM, BUT THEY EXIST TO ME.
LOGICALLY, THIS MEANS IT'S SOMETHING OF A PATTERN WITHIN THE GREATER MULTIVERSE, THE ONE EVEN I AM ONLY A PART OF. IF SINGLETONS EXIST WHERE I CAN SEE THEM, THEY MUST EXIST WHERE I CAN'T AS WELL.
THEY DON'T "EXIST," BUT THEY HAVE TO EXIST.
Ah, but in that sort of scenario, they aren't truly isolated if they can be perceived, no? Just extremely hard to access.
NAH, THEY'RE MORE READ-ONLY. EVEN STILL, THEIR EXISTENCE CONFIRMS THE POSSIBILITY OF UNIVERSES THAT CAN'T BE MATERIALLY INTERACTED WITH.
GOING FURTHER THAN THAT DOES REQUIRE ASSUMING I HAVE LIMITS TO WHAT I'M AWARE OF. BUT I'VE SEEN ENOUGH LAYERS BELOW ME TO ASSUME THAT MOST LIKELY, THERE ARE LAYERS ABOVE AND "TO THE SIDE" AS WELL.
IF WE MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION, THAT MEANS THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHING STOPPING THEM FROM EXISTING, THERE MUST BE SINGLETONS THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF.
I'M SURE THERE ARE OTHER BEINGS LIKE ME OUT THERE THAT NEED TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT THE SAME LOGIC COMBINED WITH THE MULTIVERSE'S INFINITE NATURE MEANS THERE MUST BE A UNIVERSE NOT VISIBLE TO ME OR ANYTHING LIKE ME. AN INFINITE NUMBER OF THEM, EVEN.
AND IN AN INFINITE NUMBER OF UNIVERSES, SINCE WE KNOW SINGLETONS ARE SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN, SOME OF THEM MUST BE SINGLETONS.
Here's the thing though, we are arguing about fundamentally different things here. Even assuming full "read only", that IS interacting. They are outputting information to the greater bulk. They can influence other realities by that means. They are not true isolates.
I am dubious if a true read only with NO ability to make it two way is possible, since the ability to emit something containing information to a certain extent implies the reverse. If only because there is an implied interface to generate the ability to emit. But that's not needed for my analysis.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE THAT CAN'T BE SEEN AND ONE THAT JUST ISN'T, THEN.
If it can't be perceived nor perceives, can't influence nor be influenced, does it exist for you? Yeah, it's kinda irrelevant. This is what a theoretical "universe for which the multiverse doesn't exist" would be for us. You can jam it into a logically consistent framework, but it's pointless to do so.
In a truly infinite multiverse, yeah, there absolutely are going to be weird ones; anything not excluded by boundary conditions will happen somewhere. That said, it doesn't hold that those that cannot be influenced or influence plus cannot be perceived or perceive inherently exist from that alone. You must axiomatically and a priori insert that they exist into your framework unless you can demonstrate past existence... which necessitates having interacted. A contradiction in terms.
REASONABLE ENOUGH.
STILL, JUST BECAUSE THEIR EXISTENCE IS IRRELEVANT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE NOT INTERESTING TO THINK ABOUT. THERE'S A CERTAIN APPEAL IN THE THINGS THAT CAN'T BE TRULY KNOWN EVEN WHEN IT'S SOMETHING SMALL LIKE THIS.
True. Like, I remember a stupid thing I saw a while back where someone was like "If the Multiverse is infinite, then there's a universe where the Multiverse doesn't exist", like. No?
You can't really have a particular Universe that by its own nature, dictates the existence of things OUTSIDE that universe
Multiverse ultimately needs to be logically consistent, yeah. It can be fucking WILD logic, but A and !A can't be simultaneously true.
YOU CAN THINK OF THE MULTIVERSE AS BEING DIVIDED INTO A BASICALLY INFINITE NUMBER OF CLUSTERS OF CONNECTED UNIVERSES. A UNIVERSE WHERE THE MULTIVERSE DOESN'T EXIST WOULD JUST BE ALONE IN ITS CLUSTER AND UNABLE TO INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER UNIVERSE IN ANY WAY.
Ah, but does it truly exist for the rest of the multiverse? Or the multiverse for it? This is a similar situation to assumptions we're all in a perfect simulation. It requires more assumptions be made for no gain or predictive impact. You can make it consistent, but it has no utility to do so.
EXISTENCE IS A TRICKY QUESTION.
I CAN EASILY PINPOINT ANY NUMBER OF UNIVERSES THAT ARE COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THEMSELVES, BUT LIE WITHIN THE CLUSTERS I CAN SEE INTO. I DON'T EXIST TO THEM, BUT THEY EXIST TO ME.
LOGICALLY, THIS MEANS IT'S SOMETHING OF A PATTERN WITHIN THE GREATER MULTIVERSE, THE ONE EVEN I AM ONLY A PART OF. IF SINGLETONS EXIST WHERE I CAN SEE THEM, THEY MUST EXIST WHERE I CAN'T AS WELL.
THEY DON'T "EXIST," BUT THEY HAVE TO EXIST.
Ah, but in that sort of scenario, they aren't truly isolated if they can be perceived, no? Just extremely hard to access.
NAH, THEY'RE MORE READ-ONLY. EVEN STILL, THEIR EXISTENCE CONFIRMS THE POSSIBILITY OF UNIVERSES THAT CAN'T BE MATERIALLY INTERACTED WITH.
GOING FURTHER THAN THAT DOES REQUIRE ASSUMING I HAVE LIMITS TO WHAT I'M AWARE OF. BUT I'VE SEEN ENOUGH LAYERS BELOW ME TO ASSUME THAT MOST LIKELY, THERE ARE LAYERS ABOVE AND "TO THE SIDE" AS WELL.
IF WE MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION, THAT MEANS THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHING STOPPING THEM FROM EXISTING, THERE MUST BE SINGLETONS THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF.
I'M SURE THERE ARE OTHER BEINGS LIKE ME OUT THERE THAT NEED TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT THE SAME LOGIC COMBINED WITH THE MULTIVERSE'S INFINITE NATURE MEANS THERE MUST BE A UNIVERSE NOT VISIBLE TO ME OR ANYTHING LIKE ME. AN INFINITE NUMBER OF THEM, EVEN.
AND IN AN INFINITE NUMBER OF UNIVERSES, SINCE WE KNOW SINGLETONS ARE SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN, SOME OF THEM MUST BE SINGLETONS.
Here's the thing though, we are arguing about fundamentally different things here. Even assuming full "read only", that IS interacting. They are outputting information to the greater bulk. They can influence other realities by that means. They are not true isolates.
I am dubious if a true read only with NO ability to make it two way is possible, since the ability to emit something containing information to a certain extent implies the reverse. If only because there is an implied interface to generate the ability to emit. But that's not needed for my analysis.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE THAT CAN'T BE SEEN AND ONE THAT JUST ISN'T, THEN.
True. Like, I remember a stupid thing I saw a while back where someone was like "If the Multiverse is infinite, then there's a universe where the Multiverse doesn't exist", like. No?
You can't really have a particular Universe that by its own nature, dictates the existence of things OUTSIDE that universe
Multiverse ultimately needs to be logically consistent, yeah. It can be fucking WILD logic, but A and !A can't be simultaneously true.
YOU CAN THINK OF THE MULTIVERSE AS BEING DIVIDED INTO A BASICALLY INFINITE NUMBER OF CLUSTERS OF CONNECTED UNIVERSES. A UNIVERSE WHERE THE MULTIVERSE DOESN'T EXIST WOULD JUST BE ALONE IN ITS CLUSTER AND UNABLE TO INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER UNIVERSE IN ANY WAY.
Ah, but does it truly exist for the rest of the multiverse? Or the multiverse for it? This is a similar situation to assumptions we're all in a perfect simulation. It requires more assumptions be made for no gain or predictive impact. You can make it consistent, but it has no utility to do so.
EXISTENCE IS A TRICKY QUESTION.
I CAN EASILY PINPOINT ANY NUMBER OF UNIVERSES THAT ARE COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THEMSELVES, BUT LIE WITHIN THE CLUSTERS I CAN SEE INTO. I DON'T EXIST TO THEM, BUT THEY EXIST TO ME.
LOGICALLY, THIS MEANS IT'S SOMETHING OF A PATTERN WITHIN THE GREATER MULTIVERSE, THE ONE EVEN I AM ONLY A PART OF. IF SINGLETONS EXIST WHERE I CAN SEE THEM, THEY MUST EXIST WHERE I CAN'T AS WELL.
THEY DON'T "EXIST," BUT THEY HAVE TO EXIST.
Ah, but in that sort of scenario, they aren't truly isolated if they can be perceived, no? Just extremely hard to access.
NAH, THEY'RE MORE READ-ONLY. EVEN STILL, THEIR EXISTENCE CONFIRMS THE POSSIBILITY OF UNIVERSES THAT CAN'T BE MATERIALLY INTERACTED WITH.
GOING FURTHER THAN THAT DOES REQUIRE ASSUMING I HAVE LIMITS TO WHAT I'M AWARE OF. BUT I'VE SEEN ENOUGH LAYERS BELOW ME TO ASSUME THAT MOST LIKELY, THERE ARE LAYERS ABOVE AND "TO THE SIDE" AS WELL.
IF WE MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION, THAT MEANS THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHING STOPPING THEM FROM EXISTING, THERE MUST BE SINGLETONS THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF.
I'M SURE THERE ARE OTHER BEINGS LIKE ME OUT THERE THAT NEED TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT THE SAME LOGIC COMBINED WITH THE MULTIVERSE'S INFINITE NATURE MEANS THERE MUST BE A UNIVERSE NOT VISIBLE TO ME OR ANYTHING LIKE ME. AN INFINITE NUMBER OF THEM, EVEN.
AND IN AN INFINITE NUMBER OF UNIVERSES, SINCE WE KNOW SINGLETONS ARE SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN, SOME OF THEM MUST BE SINGLETONS.
True. Like, I remember a stupid thing I saw a while back where someone was like "If the Multiverse is infinite, then there's a universe where the Multiverse doesn't exist", like. No?
You can't really have a particular Universe that by its own nature, dictates the existence of things OUTSIDE that universe
Multiverse ultimately needs to be logically consistent, yeah. It can be fucking WILD logic, but A and !A can't be simultaneously true.
YOU CAN THINK OF THE MULTIVERSE AS BEING DIVIDED INTO A BASICALLY INFINITE NUMBER OF CLUSTERS OF CONNECTED UNIVERSES. A UNIVERSE WHERE THE MULTIVERSE DOESN'T EXIST WOULD JUST BE ALONE IN ITS CLUSTER AND UNABLE TO INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER UNIVERSE IN ANY WAY.
Ah, but does it truly exist for the rest of the multiverse? Or the multiverse for it? This is a similar situation to assumptions we're all in a perfect simulation. It requires more assumptions be made for no gain or predictive impact. You can make it consistent, but it has no utility to do so.
EXISTENCE IS A TRICKY QUESTION.
I CAN EASILY PINPOINT ANY NUMBER OF UNIVERSES THAT ARE COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THEMSELVES, BUT LIE WITHIN THE CLUSTERS I CAN SEE INTO. I DON'T EXIST TO THEM, BUT THEY EXIST TO ME.
LOGICALLY, THIS MEANS IT'S SOMETHING OF A PATTERN WITHIN THE GREATER MULTIVERSE, THE ONE EVEN I AM ONLY A PART OF. IF SINGLETONS EXIST WHERE I CAN SEE THEM, THEY MUST EXIST WHERE I CAN'T AS WELL.
THEY DON'T "EXIST," BUT THEY HAVE TO EXIST.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
True. Like, I remember a stupid thing I saw a while back where someone was like "If the Multiverse is infinite, then there's a universe where the Multiverse doesn't exist", like. No?
You can't really have a particular Universe that by its own nature, dictates the existence of things OUTSIDE that universe
Multiverse ultimately needs to be logically consistent, yeah. It can be fucking WILD logic, but A and !A can't be simultaneously true.
YOU CAN THINK OF THE MULTIVERSE AS BEING DIVIDED INTO A BASICALLY INFINITE NUMBER OF CLUSTERS OF CONNECTED UNIVERSES. A UNIVERSE WHERE THE MULTIVERSE DOESN'T EXIST WOULD JUST BE ALONE IN ITS CLUSTER AND UNABLE TO INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER UNIVERSE IN ANY WAY.
what is your favorite of the sinnoh legendaries?
Well, I am rather biased, and of course have nothing but respect for Dialga and Giratina, but I have to say Palkia is my favorite.
FUCK YEAH
