this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
31 points (91.9% liked)
Casual Conversation
3339 readers
216 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There are a few theories attempting to make sense of time and timelines. I'm a medic, so this is all outside my area of expertise, but something I've been intrigued by nonetheless. The one that's made the most sense to my laymen's level of understanding is the Point Line Plane postulate which basically treats time as a literal spacial dimension.
These videos are more academic than entertaining, so it's a bit dry, but it starts with the familiar first four dimensions (length, width, depth, duration), and builds off of those to postulate all the up to the 10th dimension. After the 4th is when things start getting interesting - different time lines, dimensional folding, etc.
Sounds like it might be your cup of tea:
Part 1: https://youtu.be/JkxieS-6WuA
Part 2: https://youtu.be/ySBaYMESb8o
Duration?
It starts with that?
Then it starts with a complete and absolute failure to comprehend even the basics of relativity.
Correct - it's not about relativity. I don't understand the complaint...?
"Duration" isn't one of the "familiar first four dimensions". That's the point.
Disagree - it's one of the dimensions we can actually observe. 5th and higher are less intuitive, but length, width, depth, and duration account for the entirety of our experience.