22 songs I enjoyed in June 2026. If you check out any of these playlists, please make it this one--it has the widest span yet, genre-wise April - 12 songs March - 11 songs February - 11 songs January - 9 songs May - 14 songs
seen from China
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Iraq
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States
22 songs I enjoyed in June 2026. If you check out any of these playlists, please make it this one--it has the widest span yet, genre-wise April - 12 songs March - 11 songs February - 11 songs January - 9 songs May - 14 songs

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 β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
your story talked about faeries being able to see stuff that humans can't (the dark fire). And you said it was similar to gamma rays. can faeries see colors we can't?
Yes indeed, many of the folk are able to see a very different range upon the electromagnetic spectrum, or even a much greater range. They may even be able to differentiate more individual shades in every hue. And of course, let us not forget that they could even be capable of seeing colors entirely unique, colors we cannot even imagine. That is... assuming that their ability to perceive such things manifests as anything remotely like our ability to see certain wavelengths of light as color. Perhaps instead they might hear it, or smell it instead. Or maybe exactly 333 tiny sense organs that are easily mistaken for the tips of antlers or some other such appendage will all send a specific signal to their brains upon being hit with an exact frequency of light wave and their brain will move the 12 bones in their left vestigial wing in such a way that the twitch tells them exactly what color they're seeing. Sort of like an internal dowsing rod. An entirely different sense altogether, with all of its own nuances and insights. All of this is speculation based upon the assumption that their senses even work like our own, with nerve ending and sense organs and signals to and from a complicated brain. If, perhaps, a Faerie were to be closer to a tree, then they might sense things in the ways of those ancient standing sentinels. Trees (and other plants) have photoreceptors all over their bodies instead of contained within eyes (though you may yet meet a tree with two or significantly more eyes) and thus are capable of seeing light in a way. They speak through their roots by sending out trace amounts of chemicals into the soil and through vast networks of tree roots and fungus roots. For all you and I know, the Dryads we see as beautiful women, and the Greenmen who guard the lonely forests, could merely be a projection, a sort of living avatar of the trees or the forest. Not true in of itself, but for your benefit, a humanoid form where the preferred tree wouldn't do. (It is proposed by some researchers that not only do plants possess all five senses commonly found in humans, after a fashion, but approximately fifteen further ones that we do not possess nor require. I'm ever so excited to see where this line of research leads.) But of course, besides grand extensions of the senses we are familiar with, as well as a series of new and unique new senses we can only guess at that come with strange sense organs or entirely different biological makeups, we still have further to dream of the Folk and what they might be able to perceive. Once, when you were in a math class, you might have been introduced to the very basics of geometry. Along with a number of formulas, symbols, and numbers which we will not be going in to, they taught you of subjects such as a point, a line, and a plane? Let me remind you some of it. A point is a little dot. It is Zero Dimensional you could say, because it does not extend for any distance in any direction, but remains confined and contained within itself. Then we have a line, stretching infinitely in two directions. This is One Dimensional. If you were a creature who lived and dwelled in this Dimension you would only be able to perceive things along that line. Not up nor down nor side to side, only forward or back. Let us add another dimension. A plane, flat like a sheet of the thinnest paper in existence, so thin that it becomes invisible if seen perfectly from the edge. A being who lived and died within this plane is Two Dimensional (2D). Forever unable to look to either side, it can only see the things which lie up or down or forward or back, or any other direction you wish to give a name to, so long as it lies upon the plane and not off of it. Then we come to three dimensions (3D). In many ways, humans are in a world of three physical dimensions (at least as far as we are able to perceive for now). Like the dimensions before, it merely adds one more vector to our flat plane, one more direction in which we are able to move. Instead of a flat surface, we can suddenly move forward, back, up,
down, and side to side. Now.... what if we went further? It is easy enough in mathematics, simply account for a fourth vector, add one more set of numbers to take into account for your calculations. But how would that translate for us? We who are trapped so happily within our own perceptions? Well... let us return to our flat plane. If we were to send a sphere through the flat plane, any living flat being would see only a circle. But to their astonishment the circle would first appear from nowhere at all, then grow to an enormous size, then inexplicably shrink before vanishing once more. You see, the flat person we've made up for this exercise is only capable of seeing things that are directly on their flat plane. It can only see one very very thin slice of the sphere at any given time, so as the sphere moves through their flat world and off to the other side it appears to be changing through some strange sorcery. Now, sadly, we must cause our fictitious flat person, whom I have arbitrarily decided to name Wendell, a certain amount of emotional stress. Let us take poor, flat Wendell and turn him so that he is facing a direction that is not normally accounted for on his 2D plane. He cannot, of course, turn back. This is because he lacks the capability to turn sideways, so for the same reason he was unable to turn in this direction to begin with is why he cannot turn away from it now that we have turned him. So what shall Wendel see? Well more of the world, parts of it that connect and work with the parts he knows so well, but that he was never able to see or interact with before, parts he didn't even know were there. Like suddenly finding a new hallway in your own house that reveals an entire wing you were unaware of, but yet you cannot seem to get back to the parts you know, despite still being able to see the faded flowered wallpaper you picked out three years ago, still see the yard from the window (it is not a part of the yard you recognize, clearly your yard, but a section where the grass hasn't been mown in some time). Perhaps, if he stands in exactly the right place, Wendell might be able to hear the television still going in the living room where he left it on, still be able to catch a glimpse of the newspaper he just sat on the countertop in the kitchen. When he is where his old plane and his new plane intersect, he might be able to catch the briefest glimpse of the place he knows he ought to be. Let us restore Wendell to his proper place and look at the problem in another way. Let's say you start with a square. A flat shape. Then lets make it 3 Dimensional, a cube. Excellent. Now it has six different sides to it. But perhaps our little cube friend is being mischievous and continues on without us, becoming an entirely 4 Dimensional shape without our knowing it. What would that be like? Well... to our eyes, it would remain very much cube shaped. We could turn it and look at each side in turn, but what's this? The cube now seems to have 24 different faces instead of the usual six. As you turn it, the object seems to shift its shape, becoming almost like a hexagonal prism or a rhombic dodecahedron, before eventually returning to the shape you're familiar with but with a side you are not. This is no longer a cube, but a Tesseract, a four dimensional shape. But where is this extra part of the Tesseract at? Why can't you see it without turning this cube? It is because you are turning it through your dimension, leaving the missing sides in a fourth spatial dimension you cannot see. A direction you cannot look in. Some might like to argue that Time is the fourth dimension, and in a way, they too are correct. But that's only for a very specific type of calculations and isn't entirely relevant when looking at spatial dimensions. You could describe our ordinary every day world as 3 Dimensions of Space, and 1 Dimension of Time. Separate, but there with the other three. Now of course, you could continue on this way in mathematics, adding further vectors, directions, to shapes. Describing with fancy numbers all the
shapes you might find in a 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th or even higher dimension. But because your average everyday human can only see in the usual 3 dimensions, it becomes very difficult to visualize what things might look like with extra dimensions added on. So some mathematicians have tried to solve the problem in various ways. They either look at a four dimensional shape in a large number of slices (or pieces) and try to understand it that way, or they unfold it until it's a flat shape and they can count all the points and edges. Not a good method for seeing it properly in its entirety, but unless we manage to develop four dimensional vision it's really all we have to work with. You're probably wondering how this deals with the Folk. I shall tell you. Imagine a faerie creature who, for all intents and purposes, appeared more or less human. Maybe they move in a slightly odd way, and seem to possess very odd abilities regarding their appearance (seeming to shift colors and shapes and details with every new angle or movement). But still, they look human. Yet... you cannot help but feel something is off. This hypothetical Faerie Creature is actually a being who lives in no less than 7 Dimensions at once. A very complicated creature with a very odd and complex form. As it not only needs to interact with its fellow 7D friends but also all the Faeries and humans who exist only in dimensions below it, it has to adapt so that what each dimension sees is something they can understand. So should you suddenly gain the ability to see in 4 Dimensions you would see more of this Faerie Creature than you would before, though not all by any means. Now that we've explored this idea somewhat, let's make some important points. Some physicists have the most annoying tendency to point out various details such as the fact that we've not discovered evidence that further spatial dimensions exist or that if they do they might be very finite and looking in that direction wouldn't show you anything because it doesn't go very far (via experiments mostly to do with gravity). And others might sit and argue about the semantics of what a dimension is defined as and why time is one or isn't one, etc etc. They also love to point out that the landscape of physics is always turning, always changing, and that new things are discovered all the time which wipe away entire categories of thinking that no longer work. Or how there are a lot of mathematical ideas that are entirely abstract and theoretical with no current basis in real life. All of this is absolutely true, and well done to them for being aware of it. But still, rushing in to point it out at every opportunity is still an incredibly annoying habit. Regardless, another important thing to consider is how very alien the way a being who can not only boast of vastly different senses but extra dimensions on top of that would be to us. While not impossible for us to vaguely conceive of and write about in a tale, you run the risk of confusing your audience and shattering their willing suspension of disbelief if you stretch it too far. As much as I would love to extend myself entirely into the mindset of my hypothetical 7th Dimensional Faerie Creature with his extra seven inhuman senses and write an epic story from such a viewpoint.... the result would be a very conceptual and avant garde piece with very little for my readers to relate to and even less that they could understand without a great deal of mental effort. While a very fun exercise and test of ability, a way to explore, challenge myself, and develop my skills... It is not a story that is likely to be appreciated. If that's not your goal, then carry on. But the point remains. For those trying to build an audience, you might need to limit how many boundaries you push in each piece, slowly work your way up to greater heights, taking care to give your audience a solid trail to follow. I hope this answers your question. You asked after colors and you received so much more. (It's also entirely possible I've constructed a possible theory for how
"The Backrooms" work now that I think about it. How funny.)
Spatial Dimensions - DonatoArts
imalive im alive Im Alive
I am Alive
I Am Alive
I Am Alive
IIIII. Ammm. Aliiiiiiiiveeeee
Dimensional Delusions
Without even getting into Zeno's Paradoxes it is possible to realize the absurdity we place on any kind of dimensional, spatial or otherwise. We simply have zero amount of information on the subject, only inferences. Is an inference a fact, always to be held as true or subject to revision and change? For example, if you place's your head to the ground and hears hoof stomps moving towards you, could you be led to conclude (infer) that there is a horse coming towards you? Could this inference later be shown to be a zebra?
For spatial inference would it work the same? Let's limit our inquiry to one sense, sight and assume that the information gather from it is not from some defect or damage to the body. Feel free to try this experiment with the other senses. To begin lets try to examine the first two dimensions. For these dimensions, are both eyes required to examine or is one possible? If one is possible it would simpler to just look at the one, would it not? Essentially does all stimuli falls within a field of up/down and left/right? However, is the eye itself one sensation detector or comprising many similar kinds of detectors? Are these detectors called in science circles rods and cones? Then in order for up/down & left/right to make sense doesn't require an assumption that these detectors are placed in a uniform fashion within the eye? Before you can then claim, "but what we can examine and check where these detectors are in the eye!", don't you need to use your senses to examine the sense detectors, the sense detectors providing you the senses? Isn't this circular reasoning, the same kind of circular reasoning that gives even undergrad philosophy students a chance to mock and deride Rene Descartes in their papers and essays? Then if this is the case, then aren't the first two dimensions less determined and to claim they are is to make an ungrounded assertion at best or simply propagate ignorant delusion at worse?
Now let's examine the third dimension. Due to the ungrounded nature of the first two dimensions, wouldn't it seem that the third nature is just as ungrounded? Theres an additional component that needs to be examined to understand an additional falseness of the third dimension, Isn't the perception of the third dimension completely generated by an optical illusion of our brain merging the two sets of images our eyes collect? Do we have any sensual data of depth in the world?
Time, the forth dimension works the same way. Do we have a "time detector" or do we rely solely on inferences, these inferences are based around changes of other inferences (which are equally falsifiable), to determine time?
While it can seem like I am leading a conclusion that space and time do not exist, wouldn't this conclusion be itself an inference and thus subject to being incorrect? Is it possible to say that space and time exists but what it is is ultimately less the determined? Wouldn't treating them as anything but be willful ignorance or the doing of someone lost in delusion?

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 β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
It is such a shame we live in a universe with such a paltry number of spatial dimensions. I mean, geometry would be so much more epic. I mean, it would be exactly the same mathematically but it would just be totally cool to actually play with a dodecaplex.