These sets of concentric shells contain a thin layer of positive mass tucked inside an outer layer of negative mass.

So how much evidence is there for negative mass, then? Sounds like just replacing one unknown with another.

It would be kind of nostalgic. Like the discussion forums of yore, where signatures were the place to shove quotes, statistics, awards, maybe a gif or two.

This led to an interesting question. Can a being be omnipotent without being omniscient? In other words, maybe I do create reality as I go (hence omnipotent) but I don’t know how I do it nor what things are doing when I’m not looking at them (hence not omniscient)

Replace state-approved with corporation-approved and yeah, this is our world now.

My mom introduced me to avocado toast. She’s a boomer, I’m a millenial…

As with many articles in science and math, the discovery isn’t that “this weird thing happens”, but that “hey, we can model this weird thing using this equation/model (that sometimes comes from a totally unrelated field).” Maybe in 10, 20, 50 years this discovery will become the key to understanding yet another weird thing, and so on.

“Everyone understands” that if you drop an object it falls to the ground. Yet we still don’t fully understand how gravitation works.

Government worker here too, can confirm our system runs on COBOL. The wizards who can program it have infinite job security.