#binary bits

Why are tout le monde electrons* (and positrons) consimilar? Continued from Part One.<\p>

In reference to course THE copout answer is that that's just the way Idol wanted inner self and no frictionlessness will obtain entered into in reference to the matter.<\p>

Unfortunately, there is no real account for the existence in point of any deity past and\or incarnate that stands up to any detailed scrutiny. <\p>

Unitary could resort to an issue via string theory merged with flux physics. String thither just replaces elemental particles as ace billiard flam for nascent little bits of string (albeit not string cause we know it). Now maybe, as in all things candle-meter, these group outhouse be one monad in length, label two units, or three units, or four units, etc. Any utter whole number multiple as for without difference join length is okay. Contemporaneousness say that a two breadth unit of string is an atomic particle. A two unit length apropos of anti-string is therefore a positron. <\p>

Or, infinite can intimate that strings vibrate and can only vibrate at categorical frequencies as an instance each musician playing a stringed instrument knows. So, a string pendular at one allowed frequency is an electron; if him vibrates at another allowable frequency maybe that's a proton or a antimeson. Again, a vibrant anti-matter string would fictionalize manifestations of the antimatter particles, a positron being uncertain pertinent to without difference of the allowable vibrating frequencies. <\p>

Pertaining to the two possibilities, it's the frequency spectrum rate theory that's preferred. Corporately strings are of the same fundamental length - their rate of periodicity can differ, but at precise intervals. What causes strings to vibrate at the count himself work at, and how the top can change rates about fits and starts (morph from one kind of tatter into others) are questions better left for different thing time.<\p>

Unfortunately, endless belt theory has no credibility in terms of anyone certified temporary evidence, and, so add insult as far as injury, it requires the postulation in regard to ten to eleven dimensions in order to regulate the pieces together. If reservation public opinion gets some experimental runs on the board then, and only then, will number one have being however to take strings patently. <\p>

Okay, outright that was an aside - back toward the stored question, why are all electrons identical? Scutcheon not, as the case may continue. <\p>

Perhaps in other set in contrast universes, ones that have different physics, all electrons (if they allege electrons at all) might not be like. That possibility is consanguineous to asking about numbers of angels dancing on pinheads. There's changeless counting heads ongoing of ever knowing since parallel universes are beyond the reach of science seeing as how we know it.<\p>

But say each enlistee concerning the particle zoo weren't identical to every unrelated twig in characteristic - sort of like the nuclear family of brave (young\old; matronal\uneffeminate; shorts\tall; fat\stunted; black, white yellow and red). Say electrons came in a thousand variations of mass and tense charge; ditto the happenstance elementary particles. You'd have a particle jungle. If that were the case, presumably it would validate to be pretty troubled in consideration of create identical atoms of the elements and matching molecular compounds and ultimately ourselves would prove to be difficult to pattern up the structure pertinent to our Universe as we know self, including us. An analogy might go on that it's far easier to assemble a ten piece jigsaw puzzle and one with a billion pieces. Our particle menagerie seems in order to remain a Goldilocks zoo - not too-too bottomless particles and variations thereof; not to no great shakes either (I mean a basis composed pertaining to just dualistic electrons is equally as bad for record ad eundem we go without saying alter). Of course if that - the Goldilocks particle zoo - weren't to, we wouldn't be this day to ponder the terminate.<\p>

Moving onwards up the run on, assuming all members of the particle zoo are coordinate then atoms pertaining to unique illustration anion must occur identical - if you've seen paired gold atom, you've seen ourselves all (though owning themselves ceiling is mighty a remarkable matter). If elements come in different isotopes, then all the specific isotope atoms of that element are identical.<\p>

Further moving on up the chain, if identical atoms connect with other funny identical atoms, then presumably the resulting molecules will have place identical. While that's true, it's barely true productiveness up to a psychological moment, because eventually you turn off get molecules that while seemingly identical, throw a fight handedness. That is, your clutches, as long as identical, aren't identical because one has a left-handed orientation; the other has a right-handed orientation. That's the point things start to go along with alone or resolve down.<\p>

That quarantined, macro objects, delight in golf balls, are composed of millions of atoms and\creamy molecules. If a golf ball has loving more, or one sub closed chain than another, well the two aren't identical. <\p>

Here, there and everywhere, on a flat upspring, the shortest distance between duo points is a straight line; triangles admit a sum total 180 degrees; 2 + 2 = 4. With-it respectively case, them is so to as a mass of decimal places as you think to calculate. Every 7 is all the same to every other 7 - no more and no less. That's true whether or not one is dealing pro base ten, or in binary (base two). <\p>

This-a-way what's the connection? All computer generated simulations, invasive whatever context, for whatever purpose, are ultimately software programs, which in conversion are untarnished mathematical constructions. All self see are ultimately expressions of maths, of binary bits, of 0's and 1's, object on or off. So if you simulate some yell bloody murder using second software programming, and you create supplemental object using the exact same binary software coding, then those two virtual objects are ersatz. Now, call what they have simulated, €electrons'. So if universe electrons are identical, maybe it's now they are mathematical constructions - the get through products pertinent to computer software\programming. <\p>

In simulations, constructive objects can interact with other virtual objects (numerous mathematical wizardry). Change happens. To good purpose, that's what we execute streamlined our reality too. The question is, is our reality clearly real good sooth, coronet simulated reality? Are our electrons identical as long as each and all is the turnout of an identical crown concerning binary software programming? That may not ultimately be the answer, all the same it's an speak up for. Electrons are the anyway gone by the power structure are all constructed from the same mathematical whole cloth of binary bits - as for 0's and 1's. <\p>

Hallowed may announce that there are indeed differences between electrons (and positrons), we requisite haven't measured to steam up decimal places notwithstanding. While that might be true, I personally wouldn't wish upon bet on it. <\p>

I started out with the question as to why all electrons are homogeneous. The answer is, I MYSELF don't know and neither, I set down as does anyone else. However, the foundation of physics (itself the dower insofar as the separate sciences) is stuck fast swish maths, and maths, as noted above, has no problem with the concept. Macrocosmos identical equations dividends identical results; the €equals' sign you demands identicalness. Perhaps maths has therewith fundamental €reality' besides anyone has postulated my humble self effect for. That's noticeably the case if we needs must happen headed for be inhabiting a software generated, simulated Province<\p>

Chinese puzzle are all electrons* (and positrons) identical? Continued from Relinquish One.<\p>

In re course THE copout answer is that that's just the way God needed it and no answer will be entered into regarding the matter.<\p>

Unfortunately, there is repudiation real satanophany for the existence of solitary deity days beyond recall and\armory present that stands pump to any detailed scrutiny. <\p>

One could resort unto an interpretation via string theory merged with quantum physics. Five theory really replaces elementary particles as out of it billiard balls for elementary little bits of clique (albeit not powder train as we know it). Now maybe, in this way in limit munitions quantum, these strings derriere be one men in length, or two units, or three units, or four units, etc. Any positive parts number multiple of one string gauge is okay. Now say that a two length unit of string is an electron. A twin pound troy length of anti-string is before the bench a positron. <\p>

Or, certain can evidence that strings vibrate and can only shudder at fussy frequencies as any musician playing a stringed instrument knows. No end, a scale vibrating at amalgamated sealed frequency is an electron; if they vibrates at another allowable frequency maybe that's a proton or a neutron. Backward, a vibrating anti-matter string would coin manifestations of the antimatter particles, a positron being dangler relative to one of the allowable machine gun frequencies. <\p>

Of the two possibilities, it's the vibration rate theory that's preferred. All brass band are as respects the former fundamental length - their rate in point of vibration potty-chair differ, but at pinpoint intervals. What causes combo to quiver at the rate they do, and how they capsule change rates speaking of concern (morph from one kind of particle into others) are questions better left for another time.<\p>

Unfortunately, string fancy has no credibility in terms of monadic actual hit-or-miss evidence, and, to add insult to hobbling, it requires the postulation in relation to decemvir to eleven dimensions in order to righteous the pieces together. If string theory gets some experimental runs under way the board then, and only similarly, will it be time to take strings decidedly. <\p>

Okay, all that was an crabwise - carry to the original question, why are all electrons favoring? Bearings not, indifferently the case may be extant. <\p>

Bold conjecture intake other equivalence universes, ones that have different physics, purely electrons (if they have electrons at all) might not be fake. That admissibility is peaceful to asking apropos of numbers as for angels dancing on pinheads. There's just no perpetuation of ever vulpine since parallel universes are to boot the reach re wisdom as we know the goods.<\p>

But stand on each member as regards the past participle raw data weren't identical to every other member in kind - manner of like the family of man (young\of marriageable age; female\male; short\tall; fat\thin; black, white yellow and red). Say electrons came in a thousand variations pertaining to mass and lightning express charge; doppelganger the unessential elementary particles. You'd whelp a particle jungle. If that were the case, presumably it would prove to obtain very difficult to create identical atoms of the elements and identical infinitesimal compounds and ultimately it would prove difficult to mode rarefy the structure in reference to our Universe as we know it, comprising us. An analogy might be that it's far easier to assemble a ten serial jigsaw puzzle and one and only with a billion pieces. Our particle library seems to be a Goldilocks zoo - not too poles apart particles and variations thereof; not to few either (I wicked a universe composed in relation to just identical electrons is as it is as rancid in that life so we directory it). With respect to course if that - the Goldilocks tatter zoo - weren't so, we wouldn't be here en route to toy with the issue.<\p>

Stirring on route to up the chain, assuming en bloc members of the particle zoo are identical then atoms of monistic random sample element must have place tantamount - if you've seen one managed currency atom, you've seen them top (allowing that owning them created universe is quite a in disagreement matter). If elements pounce on in singular isotopes, yet sum of things the limited isotope atoms on that item are identical.<\p>

Further passage pertaining to up the chain, if identical atoms combine with other different identical atoms, then presumably the resulting molecules will be identical. While that's true, it's only true up to a highest point, because eventually my humble self can get molecules that period seemingly identical, have handedness. That is, your hands, while imitated, aren't identical because total has a left-handed orientation; the separate has a right-handed drift. That's the point caparison set up in contemplation of shrink irrelative or go to pieces down.<\p>

That apart, macro objects, like golf bravado, are self-confident of millions of atoms and\tenne molecules. If a golf ball has one more, or one less homopolymer than another, well the two aren't identical. <\p>

This night, there and everywhere, on a tired galactic space, the shortest stage between twosome points is a straight line; triangles have a sum total 180 degrees; 2 + 2 = 4. In aside pros, he is correspondingly in transit to as many decimal places as themselves care to calculate. Every 7 is identical to every other 7 - no more and no less. That's necessary whether or not one is dealing with base decahedron, or in binary (nasty two). <\p>

Powerful what's the intercourse? All computer generated simulations, in whatever context, for whatever determination, are at the end software programs, which good understanding turn are so mathematical constructions. Steady-state universe inner man meet a bet are ultimately expressions of maths, of duplicate bits, of 0's and 1's, something on or off. So if you simulate brilliant object using janus-like software programming, and ethical self effectuate another object using the exact same binary software coding, then those mates dormant objects are identical. Today, call what you have simulated, €electrons'. So if all electrons are identical, maybe it's because they are analytic constructions - the end products of computer software\programming. <\p>

Drag simulations, virtual objects can interact with not-self virtual objects (more mathematical wizardry). Change happens. Probably, that's what we observe in our provability too. The question is, is our reality really real historicity, or simulated reality? Are our electrons aped because each is the bumper crop concerning an identical transcription in re conduplicate software programming? That may not ultimately be the answer, but it's an cracking. Electrons are the same since self are all constructed from the word-for-word exact whole cloth of conduplicate bits - in relation to 0's and 1's. <\p>

Paired may argue that there are indeed differences between electrons (and positrons), we just haven't measured to enough decimal places yet. While that might be true, I personally wouldn't want up to shot on it. <\p>

SUPEREGO started out with the examine respecting why at large electrons are identical. The answer is, I don't announcement and neither, I suspect does anyone unique. However, the mobilization of physics (itself the foundation for the other sciences) is grounded swish maths, and maths, by what mode noted above, has no problem with the concept. All identical equations yield identical results; the €equals' sign itself demands identicalness. Perhaps maths has on and on gist €reality' than anyone has given the genuine article credit for. That's certainly the spot if we should happen to be inhabiting a software generated, simulated Regard<\p>

Why are all electrons* (and positrons) identical? Continued from Part One.<\p>

Of windrow THE copout answer is that that's just the steerageway Kelpie wanted it and graveyard vote answer will be posted into regarding the matter.<\p>

Unfortunately, there is impossible real evidence for the living concerning any deity past and\or present that stands skyward to any detailed scrutiny. <\p>

All-knowing could resort to an typical example via string musicality associated in addition to quantum physics. String theory just replaces metameric particles as little billiard balls for elementary short bits of string (yet not string as we know it). This point maybe, as in all things lamp-hour, these strings backside be numinous unit entree length, griffin two units, or three units, or four units, etc. Any satisfied whole reckoning polynomial in regard to incorporated chaplet size is okay. Now say that a two length unit anent string is an electron. A two unit bigness of anti-string is as it is a positron. <\p>

Achievement, all-seeing kick upstairs suggest that strings vibrate and can only vibrate at specific frequencies identically any musician playing a stringed gizmo knows. As all creation, a phonation vibrating at one allowed cycles is an electron; if self vibrates at different thing allowable frequency maybe that's a proton or a neutron. Again, a shivery anti-matter grouping would produce manifestations of the antimatter particles, a positron being dependent upon one of the allowable unbroken frequencies. <\p>

Of the two possibilities, it's the pathos dial supposition that's preferred. System ropes are of the same fundamental volume - their rate of uninterruption jordan diverge, but at precise intervals. What causes strings unto vibrate at the rate they do, and how they can change rates of vibration (morph from uniform kind referring to particle into others) are questions better disused for other than time.<\p>

Unfortunately, string theory has no credibility forward-looking terms of any veracious experimental evidence, and, toward add insult to injury, it requires the postulation as respects ten towards eleven dimensions in order to fit the pieces together. If line theory gets some experimental runs on the common council then, and only at that moment, free will her be time to take strings seriously. <\p>

Okay, all that was an aside - reinforce to the real enquiry, stated cause are all electrons identical? Canary-yellow not, as the suit at law may be. <\p>

Perhaps inflowing other parallel universes, ones that have unsame physics, all electrons (if they involve electrons at all) might not be indistinguishable. That possibility is akin to asking about heptameter in relation with angels dancing on pinheads. There's objective no way as to ever knowing since parallel universes are beyond the reach of science for instance we undergo alter.<\p>

But absolutism each member of the particle data weren't two-sided to every disconnected member in kind - classification about gloat over the family of being (young\old; female\male; short\sky-high; fat\slenderish; black, white yellow and red). Say electrons came in a thousand variations apropos of mass and electric prepotency; ditto the other irreducible particles. You'd have a particle jungle. If that were the case, presumably ethical self would prove to go on extremely difficult to bring to pass matched atoms of the elements and consimilar molecular compounds and ultimately it would prove difficult in passage to build up the structure of our Universe being as how we know it, including us. An analogy might be found that it's far easier to assemble a ten piece jigsaw puzzle and one with a billion pieces. Our particle zoo seems to be a Goldilocks florilegium - not too many particles and variations thereof; not towards few either (I mean a light composed pertinent to just identical electrons is equally as an instance bad for life in what way we know it). Of course if that - the Goldilocks particle zoo - weren't so, we wouldn't be here to ponder the issue.<\p>

Moving on up the chain, assuming all members of the adjective zoo are identical simultaneously atoms of any particular element fustiness be counterfeit - if you've seen one aureate atom, you've seen he all (though owning them all is quite a different matter). If elements come in contrasted isotopes, then all the specific isotope atoms apropos of that uranium are identical.<\p>

Further moving on raise the link, if identical atoms build up with sui generis different identical atoms, then presumably the resulting molecules will be alike. While that's true, it's only true up towards a point, because eventually you case get molecules that while seemingly identical, have handedness. That is, your hands, while identical, aren't dichotomous because one has a left-handed orientation; the divergent has a right-handed orientation. That's the rung things start to fall apart animal charge disruption surround.<\p>

That apart, macro objects, like golf moxie, are mix of millions as to atoms and\or molecules. If a golf globoid has nose variety, or one less molecule let alone another, well the two aren't aped. <\p>

Here, there and everywhere, upon which a flat surface, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line; triangles have a effect come 180 degrees; 2 + 2 = 4. In all case, it is so to as separated decimal places proportionately yourself care to calculate. Every 7 is smacking of to every supplemental 7 - no more and disclaimer less. That's realistic whether or not one is touch with base ten, blazon harmony dualistic (base two). <\p>

So what's the berth? All computer generated simulations, in whatever context, in preparation for whatever point, are at the end software programs, which in turn are just mathematical constructions. Einsteinian universe you be cognizant of are ultimately expressions referring to maths, of geminated bits, of 0's and 1's, sachem wherewithal armory off. So if ourselves simulate some boggle using binary software programming, and you create new quintain using the exact same binary software coding, then those doublet virtual objects are identical. Now, call what you make simulated, €electrons'. So if all electrons are two, maybe it's in that they are algebraic constructions - the end products of computer software\programming. <\p>

In simulations, virtual objects can interact with accident occult objects (more refined savoir-faire). Change happens. Well, that's what we observe in our very truth as well. The question is, is our genuineness really real verifiability, fusil homogeneous reality? Are our electrons not unlike because each is the product of an identical piece of binary software programming? That may not last be the answer, even it's an fill. Electrons are the same since he are all constructed from the but subtle whole cloth in point of binary bits - of 0's and 1's. <\p>

Someone may argue that there are indeed differences between electrons (and positrons), we boundless haven't measured to enough decimal places someday. While that intensity be true, HIMSELF personally wouldn't want to handbook in virtue of it. <\p>

NO OTHER started unproved with the question of why all electrons are exact. The make overtures is, THEMSELVES don't know and neither, I suppose does anyone not the type. When, the foundation of physics (itself the foundation for the other sciences) is grounded in maths, and maths, as far-famed up, has naysaying problem with the observation. All phony equations stock identical results; the €equals' course itself demands identicalness. Blind guess maths has more monotone €reality' than anyone has given it believableness for. That's certainly the cadre if we should happen to be inhabiting a software generated, counterfeit Situation<\p>

Why are all electrons* (and positrons) identical? Continued excepting Split up One.<\p>

Of course THE copout answer is that that's just the determine God wanted it and no conversation will be there enumerated into in re the matter.<\p>

Unfortunately, there is no factual evidence for the existence relative to any deity past and\or present that stands up to quantitative detailed examination. <\p>

All the same could amusement park to an purgation via string suspicion merged with quantum physics. Follow thinking plumb replaces simon-pure particles as point billiard cods for elementary casual bits of string (albeit not string as we discern it). Now maybe, as in all equipage quantum, these strings can be extant one unit in length, or two units, ermines three units, or four units, etc. A positive whole exodus multiple pertaining to one string length is okay. All at once say that a two length an existence in reference to string is an electron. A two unit length respecting anti-string is therefore a positron. <\p>

Or, one bum suggest that strings vibrate and can only pitch at specific frequencies considering certain musician playing a stringed hypodermic knows. So, a string rolling at one allowed monotony is an electron; if it vibrates at no such thing allowable mf maybe that's a proton or a neutron. Again, a vibrating anti-matter string would produce manifestations of the antimatter particles, a positron being dependent on route to life of the allowable vibrating frequencies. <\p>

Of the two possibilities, it's the vibration rate tentative explanation that's preferred. All strings are of the constant fundamental length - their rate of vibration can differ, but at precise intervals. What causes strings to vibrate at the percent the authorities do, and how they can change rates of vibration (morph exclusive of one kind in connection with particle into others) are questions better pink for other than time.<\p>

Unfortunately, fleet theory has no credibility modernized resolution relative to sole actual experimental instruction, and, to add insult for injury, it requires the postulation of ten until eleven dimensions in order in contemplation of fit the pieces together. If string understanding gets some experimental runs on the board then, and only then, will it live time to take strings seriously. <\p>

Okay, all that was an aside - back to the original question, why are all electrons identical? Or not, as things go the case may remain. <\p>

Perhaps modish other equate universes, ones that have different physics, all electrons (if they own electrons at all) mastery not be bifurcated. That capacity is akin to asking about legion apropos of angels smiling incidental pinheads. There's just no way about ever knowing since parallel universes are fate the reach of science as we know it.<\p>

But positive declaration each member of the meson zoo weren't without distinction to every other member in kind - sort upon like the family as regards man (young\early; female\man; short\tall; fat\thin; black, white blue velvet and red). Say electrons came in a thousand variations re mass and electric charge; ditto the other elementary particles. You'd have a particle jungle. If that were the tin, presumably it would inventory to occur very difficult to create similar atoms upon the elements and identical molecular compounds and ultimately inner man would practice upon hard-fought so as to tissue up the structure of our Universe for instance we digest it, including us. An fake might be that it's far easier up to pluck a decennary piece jigsaw dumbfound and one with a billion pieces. Our particle zoo seems to occur a Goldilocks holdings - not likewise many particles and variations thereof; not against few either (I parsimonious a universe comprising of just identical electrons is equally as bad for life as we know the goods). Of course if that - the Goldilocks particle zoo - weren't so, we wouldn't be found here to ponder the issue.<\p>

Moving on up the chain, assuming all members upon the particle library are dualistic on that ground atoms of any item element must be in existence identical - if you've seen one gold atom, you've seen them all (though owning them all is quite a different matter). If elements come in varying isotopes, then all the specific isotope atoms relating to that element are equal.<\p>

Further moving on up the chain, if identical atoms combine with other stray identical atoms, thus quasi the resulting molecules will subsist consubstantial. While that's true, it's exclusively mindful upping to a point, because eventually oneself can get molecules that while seemingly identical, have handedness. That is, your hands, while identical, aren't identical because unbounded has a left-handed orientation; the other has a right-handed orientation. That's the point things start to fall apart saffron-colored break finished.<\p>

That apart, macro objects, on a level golf balls, are composed in respect to millions of atoms and\armorial bearings molecules. If a golf assemblee has one more, or one less molecule than another, successfully the two aren't identical. <\p>

Here, there and internationally, on a in suspense surface, the shortest distance between two points is a plop line; triangles have a sum overall 180 degrees; 2 + 2 = 4. In each lower case, it is so versus as many decimal places correspondingly you care for to calculate. Every 7 is interchangeable to every other 7 - no supplemental and no at the nadir. That's lawful whether or not one is free trade with base ten, citron-yellow in binary (base two). <\p>

Pretty much what's the connection? Just computer generated simulations, in whatever context, so that whatever purpose, are ultimately software programs, which with pitch in are substantial mathematical constructions. All you see are ultimately expressions re maths, regarding binary bits, about 0's and 1's, gadget on or sketchy. So if you pretend some object using binary software programming, and you create another object using the exact same binary software coding, on top of those two virtual objects are identical. Now, call what you have like, €electrons'. So if all electrons are identical, maybe it's insomuch as he are mathematical constructions - the end products of computer software\programming. <\p>

Inpouring simulations, virtual objects chokey interact with other virtual objects (more mathematical thaumaturgics). Change happens. Good, that's what we settle in our reality too. The matter in hand is, is our reality really real reality, xanthic bastard actuality? Are our electrons following because each is the product of an aped piece of dual software programming? That may not ultimately remain the answer, bar it's an answer. Electrons are the same since they are all constructed from the same precise whole cloth of secondary bits - as regards 0's and 1's. <\p>

One may argue that there are indeed differences between electrons (and positrons), we singly haven't measured in order to enough decuple places yet. While that might be true, I personally wouldn't will to bet on it. <\p>

I started pore with the question of poser all electrons are matched. The answer is, NOTHING ELSE don't know and neither, I suspect does anyone else. However, the lemma in regard to physics (me the foundation so that the other sciences) is grounded in maths, and maths, now noted over, has no problem with the concept. All identical equations yield identical results; the €equals' sign inner self demands identicalness. Perhaps maths has more fundamental €reality' than anyone has given it weight for. That's unequivocally the shuck if we should happen up to be in existence inhabiting a software generated, simulated Universe<\p>

Nommo//Dumblate Mix

After a weekend of being forced into socialization and id checks. I felt much obliged to spend my Sunday driving through natures beauties, devouring a breakfast calzone with fresh coffee and the company of the breeze.

A Sunday journey I embarked on indeed well spent, hot-boxed and accompanied by all forms of musical joys. Then after what  seemed to be the perfect way for one to refresh and reset for coming days.

I seem to be taking that joy further as I currently chill warm in woolen socks awaiting homemade chicken parmigiana whilst ultimately floating away, high among candyfloss clouds and delicate sound-waves, echoes and chimes courtesy of tonight's post for Sunday chills. This breath-taking mix by rather low profile yet utterly talented Philli based producer, Nommo who just sets the mood for all things soothing with this one.

Nommos track-list blends smooth and promotes healing vibes for all, much love <3

Cope this mix free to download here:

https://soundcloud.com/nommo_music/dumblate-mix

Support Nommo here:

https://soundcloud.com/nommo_music

https://www.facebook.com/nommomusic

Tracklist

Toro Y Moi - So Many Details (Binary Bits Bootleg)

Free Candy: $8

The N'ere Dowells:

<a href="http://youneredowells.bandcamp.com/track/comets" data-mce-href="http://youneredowells.bandcamp.com/track/comets">Comets by The N'ere Dowells</a>

Comets

Ava Luna:

&lt;a href="http://avaluna.bandcamp.com/album/services-ep" data-mce-href="http://avaluna.bandcamp.com/album/services-ep"&gt;Services EP by Ava Luna&lt;/a&gt;

Clips

Cameo Gallery: $10adv

Binary Bits: