Toggle light / dark theme

AI is Pandora’s box, s’ true…

On the one hand we can’t close it and on the other hand our current direction is not good. And this is gonna get worse as AI starts taking its own ‘creative’ decisions… the human overlords will claim it has nothing to do with them if and when things go wrong.

The solution for commercialization is actually quite simple.

If my dog attacks a child on the street when off the leash who is responsible?

The owner of course. Although I dislike that word when it comes to anything living, maybe the dogs human representative is a better term.

So where did the antimatter go?

This question is one of the biggest mysteries of modern science, and the answer is unknown. Something happened in the earliest moments of the universe to make the antimatter disappear. From our best current measurements of the primordial radiation of the Big Bang (called the cosmic microwave background radiation, or CMB), something tilted the scales in favor of matter, with the ratio of for every three billion antimatter particles, there were three billion and one matter particles. The two sets of three billions cancelled and made the CMB, and the remaining tiny amount of matter went on to form the stars and galaxies that we see in our telescopes today. For this to happen, some physical process had to favor matter over antimatter.

While Einstein’s theory says that matter and antimatter should exist in exactly equal quantities, in 1964, researchers found that a class of subatomic particles called quarks slightly favor matter over antimatter. Quarks are found inside the protons and neutrons at the center of atoms. While this was an important observation, the differences between matter and antimatter quarks were too small to explain the dominance of matter we see in the universe.

In my humble opinion, this was very real but is still based on science. But quantum mechanics would democratize this technology rather than needing a human interface. I think in the right hands and doing good it comes essentially do so much even materializing water or food endlessly using psionic abilities. Really quantum mechanics could lead to even materializing a cup of coffee from a computer. This is probably the most groundbreaking knowledge because quantum mechanics can prove that this is real. There are still ethical problems with this technology but the possibilities make this essentially a cheaper form of a replicator than essentially a Higgs boson one may be using a lot less energy. If it was fully understood it could allow for real psionic abilities for everyone maybe using a device perhaps even with a limiter for safety or even air-gapped so it is just on a smartphone. One day you could essentially just press a button on a smartphone and a cup of coffee would materialize or your favorite beverage, not just a uber or teleportation but essentially real materializing which some say that has been used possibly since the founding of the planet earth based on mythology seen from all over the planet earth.


SPINE-chilling stories about the sinister goings-on at Camp Hero air force base in Montauk have long been the stuff of local legend.

Since the Seventies, tall tales have surrounded the derelict facility in Long Island, New York.

Most concern the US Government’s top secret Montauk Project — which, so the stories go, involved kidnapped kids, mind-control experiments, time travel, psychic brainwashing, aliens and a petrifying, other-worldly beast.

High-entropy alloys, which are made from nearly equal parts of several primary metals, could hold great potential for creating materials with superior mechanical properties.

But with a practically unlimited number of possible combinations, one challenge for metallurgists is figuring out where to focus their research efforts in a vast, unexplored world of metallic mixtures.

A team of researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology has developed a new process that could help guide such efforts. Their approach involves building an atomic resolution chemical map to help gain new insights into individual and help characterize their properties.

New post!


Having a faster rate of epigenetic aging, as measured by the epigenetic age metric, AgeAccelGrim, is associated with a significantly increased risk of death for all causes in a variety of cohorts, including the Framingham Heart Study (FHS), the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study, the InChianti study, the Jackson Heart Study (JHS), and collectively, when evaluated as a meta-analysis (Lu et al. 2019):

Screen Shot 2019-12-07 at 2.23.27 PM.png

With the goal of minimizing disease risk and maximizing longevity, can epigenetic aging be slowed? Shown below is the correlation between dietary components with AgeAccelGrim. Dietary factors that were significantly associated (the column labelled, “p”) with a younger epigenetic age were carbohydrate intake, dairy, whole grains, fruit, and vegetables. In contrast, dietary fat intake and red meat were associated with older epigenetic ages (Lu et al. 2019):

Families with long, healthy life spans focus of $68 million grant~ via Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis https://medicine.wustl.edu/news/families-with-long-healthy-l…ion-grant/


A few hundred of the thousands of proteins circulating in our blood turn out to be a fairly accurate forecaster of a person’s age, scientists reported Thursday — though one’s biological age, which doesn’t always match one’s number of years.

This “proteomic clock,” as the researchers call it, relies on measurements of levels of the proteins, which rise and fall over the years. While it’s a nifty discovery, for now it remains just that. Researchers need to first develop a much better understanding of these proteins; if they can, they said, it might be possible to one day look at their levels to gauge the success of drugs being tested in clinical trials, or even to develop a therapy from a cocktail of proteins that could act like a rejuvenation boost or improve health.

“Why are these proteins so tightly linked to aging?” said Tony Wyss-Coray, professor of neurology and neurological sciences at Stanford and the senior author of the paper4, which was published Thursday in the journal Nature Medicine.