/compounds/ - The Compounds of Harmony

>>2804

On a more serious note, when there isn't drama to be had, I usually get myself involved in text-based RP 80% of the time.

Occasionally, I'll invite people in the Clients chat to play Board Game Online with me. Last time we played, we were doing Boss Mode and Slit was the closest to the finish line when the boss (me) won.

And every other day, I go onto CSGO Lounge and bet weapon skins on competitive matches.

>>2804

>not bringing Compounds drama to /pone/ by recruiting there

>>2807

Am I the only one that sees something wrong with that image?

>>2818

It's the direction she's turning the page.

>>2893

>this asshole

I've already got a wire coathanger, so all I need is his mom's address 15 years ago and a time machine.

>>2894

Oh, hi! You know, I was wondering if you were still alive or not last night. You've been awful quiet during this war.

>>2895

>You've been awful quiet during this war.

Nightmare's Watch takes no part, and I've had enough accusations of bias for one eon. Unless somebody's cheating, I'm intentionally making it not my business.

>>2896

>Admin confirmed as NMM?

The official clop lore thickens.

>>3526

Picked up Ziggurat since a friend suggested I should pick it up. Also snagged Grow Home and Duke Nukem 3D.

GOG.com is also having their sale for those that are interested. Picked up more than I should have from them over the last week or so.

A friend asked me to bitch about episode 100, so I might as well. Bitching is my cutie mark:

Why would people be less concerned about a groom being nervous 28 hours before a wedding than 4 hours before?

So Derpy, who's back to being Derpy by the way after that little season 2 snafu, is working in the stationary industry?

Doc's character exemplifies both a lack of understanding of Doctor Who on any level, plus is an opening for lawsuits of the Britishkind. Especially with the centuries reference.

Science isn't an answer.

Vinyl lacks any identifiable features to her being an actual character, and instead is just a plot device.

Spell lasers? Still?

I can't not feel bad for Sparkler. It's mathematically impossible.

Lily, Rose, and Daisy's fainting at a bunny invasion makes sense, they specifically target their primary form of income. Them fainting at the slightest complaint seems to be more of a biological condition, possibly low blood pressure. Or they're all high.

Also, considering flowers need arrangement, they would have to be planning on an all nighter which is really terrible organization.

Lyra, Bon-bon. There's a series of words for that. My impression puts it somewhere between straight-washing ( cause they're Friends ), and gay-baiting ( They act just like gays, except they totally aren't! ). It's a clearly calculated move to get the most praise for the least amount of risk.

Steven Magnet

Also, he's a river dragon.

Three minutes to shove Vinyl and Octavia in the same retarded, toyetic house. By the goddamn playset you stupid kids.

"Wub" based propulsion would require the sound system to be reversed. For it to work the way it's animated, one would need to invent some sort of… negative unit of force. You'd basically have to reinvent physics to create vacuums of sound or something.

Why would Gummy get a internal dialogue, but never even acknowledge any of the other pets?

Luna & Celestia haven't gotten a wedding invite since the end of Season 2? Like at all? I still can't believe there hasn't been a winter since season 2 either…

The last time Luna and Celestia were that bitchy, Nightmare Moon tried to rule the world with an iron fist.

The pony based on David Tennant wearing the first fourth doctor scarf is again, without understanding of Doctor Who and a clear venue for a BBC lawsuit. Then you have him say allons y to drill your terrible joke home.

Two terrible speeches. No limits.

This is why you don't let the same person write and edit their own episode.

>>3565

Though comparing it to Princess Spike, the realization hits me, that it would be a way better episode if it was story and written by the story boarding cast. Especially seeing as they are really the origin of every background character anyways.

They've always been the design crew's characters, it would be more true to let them handle the series of vignettes.

MA Larson didn't even stick around for season four, and none of them were characters he would normally focus on anyways.

>>3565

gays -> queers

>"Wub" based propulsion would require the sound system to be reversed. For it to work the way it's animated, one would need to invent some sort of… negative unit of force. You'd basically have to reinvent physics to create vacuums of sound or something.<

No problem: Bernoulli effect.

A person has no their.

>>3588

>gays -> queers

Gay baiting and queer baiting are both similar terminology for the same types of loaded media.

Wikipedia has a definition for Queerbaiting, where as Huffington Post uses the tag Gay Baiting for the same types of media events.

>Bernoulli effect.

I'd go with that, if not for the higher pressure zone being the front of the sound system. Like I said, I'd be fine if the speakers were reversed, but as is, the force should have been pushing backwards. Anything else requires magic, at which point the scene loses it's lack of control.

> A person has no their.

http://www.studygs.net/vocab/there.htm

"Their" is the posessive pronoun.

Their form of income is the correct use of the term.

MA Larson story editing a episode written by MA Larson is one person editing their own script.

Now I've said their so much it's lost meaning. Also this is just my outline notes, I wasn't even doing a complete review.

>>3590

It's irrelevant what terms society uses when it's wrong. Gay means flashy manner and is the opposite of coy. Pastels are by definition gay. The meaning was forgotten so the word was supplanted by campy, and campy's forgotten and supplanted by swishy.

>I'd go with that, if not for the higher pressure zone being the front of the sound system. Like I said, I'd be fine if the speakers were reversed, but as is, the force should have been pushing backwards. Anything else requires magic, at which point the scene loses it's lack of control.<

A speaker isn't a jet engine. Sound waves aren't ballistic. Relativity deniers treat waves as if they were. The gross motion back and forth makes a net low pressure. This could never work if sound didn't suck: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sound|sonic+levitation.

its, hick.

>"Their" is the posessive pronoun.

Their form of income is the correct use of the term.

MA Larson story editing a episode written by MA Larson is one person editing their own script.

Now I've said their so much it's lost meaning. Also this is just my outline notes, I wasn't even doing a complete review.<

Their is the possessive of they. Who are they besides MA Larson?

>>3591

>It's irrelevant what terms society uses when it's wrong.

Damn straight! Fuck Language!

Ppl be usin tha' shite all rong ifin you b axing meh.

Who cares if niggas is usin` dey dere theirs dat an' dey is all wrong. Dey really aught ta use language like it wuz supposed ta be used back in da early fifteenf century.

And you win, I got mad. Now I owe you a cupcake.

>>3591

Words' meanings change. Doesn't make them "wrong", necessarily.

The sound pressure I know about (very little about the actual mechanics, I admit) would indeed work in front of the speaker. Though you do have scientific evidence, and "acoustic levitation" is awesome!

And as far as I (non-native speaker) know, "they"/"their" can be used as gender-neutral pronouns even when talking about individual persons? Which Minty does a lot?

>>3605

Also fuck your theistic and prayer rot. Prayer kills cancer patients. Does that please you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rz6UzqegA6Q&lc=z12sznzi4lfyjrag004cgjcprtmvdbxooqk0k

>>3606

Words' meanings are determined by coiners and then bastardized by malliterate generations later.

They is common gender plural, not neutral gender singular (it) nor neutral gender plural (some). However they is also a Norse import and I generally use the relative pronoun who as the common gender singular and plural.

>>3608

Oh, and there is the absolute gender singular one, whose genitive/possessive is one's, of course.

>>3608

>Words' meanings are determined by coiners and then bastardized by malliterate generations later.

Yes. Which means they change, as I said. I never said why they would change, just that they do. And as Minty pointed out, such changes, wherever they may come from, dissipate into common vocabulary and into dictionaries, making them correct. I actually agree with you in not liking it, but that doesn't make Minty wrong.

>Acoustic levitation

Yep, sound radiation pressure does indeed work in front of the speaker, and is a net pushing force (barring emergent features, which might be possible at the right object, speaker and sound velocities). And as far as I understand it, this force only acts on an object, not on the speaker itself, since it's the result of the high-pressure parts of the sound wave, not originating in the speaker. Go home, Newton's third law!

Acoustic levitation apparently is achieved by standing waves, and while a similar system could be used to move objects instead of just holding them, all of that can only be achieved if the wave is reflected somewhere or using a second speaker.

And I am, in fact, a physicist.

>>3615

>It gives me more joy than you could possibly imagine.<

Is this Poe's sarcasm or fundamentalist's derangement?

>If God didn't want them to die of cancer, they would know to do something about it. God isn't a magic alien who just fixes shit because you asked nicely. He wanted to kill Issac if he didn't show up at the last moment screaming Lul, no.<

Unless you're Israelite, you don't get to call j·hveh [or rather shaddæ whom j·hveh posed as much later] God, which itself was translated from Vulgate Deus where in Hellènic it was only in the lowercase definite "ho theos" for "the god". One commandment admits the plurality of gods; the plurality of even Abrahamic gods in the creation passages and a god for each elder of Israel (70) betrays their pagan background and plagiarism, mainly of the Avesta and Atra-Xasis. If you want to refer to a god you must do so by name or by dispensation. As one of my titles on Twitter is indispensationalist, I am fully readen on how to deconstruct any modern theist's rationalization of the history of gods and religions and their alleged relations with men.

The New Testament passages on http://godisimaginary.com and http://whywontgodhealamputees.com actually do claim that the god does behave like a storybook genie for believers. But believers will retrodict the outcome so they conform to this fabricated person's mind, all the while ignore the passages that this person is alleged to enforce.

If this god is simply whatever happens, then there is no distinction between god and nongod, and there is no need for the extra word god. That leaves the puzzle of what those nonmen speakers in those ancient <strike>comic books</strike> holy scriptures were, and why they didn't know anything that their authors already knew.

>If you don't like that gay and queer are related synonyms, maybe you should start an online campaign about it. I'm sure if you do it really well, language will recover through your efforts. I don't think it will, but I'm negative about it<

It only will if the world is interested in dictionaries and the history of its own talk.

>I figured it out. In both cases the they in question is Writers. The two groups in question are Writers acting as Writers, and Writers acting as Editors.<

This referend must be in a clause.

>It's funny. I've gone through a few of your sample videos, and the bulk of them seem to be focused on using multiple speaker systems to establish stable high pressure areas between at least two sources the least complicated of which still requires a reflection surface of some sort.<

Says who? A wave is a fluctuation of pressure.

>Sound being used as propulsion isn't unreasonable. The inverse comes off rather unnatural, as the system would already innately need to be fighting gravity to operate in both cases.<

The waves themselves aren't ballistic. Convection must come from nonlinear effects like drag, where the speaker shapes a wave into a pulse train, or foreign bodies.

>>3616

>Yes. Which means they change, as I said. I never said why they would change, just that they do. And as Minty pointed out, such changes, wherever they may come from, dissipate into common vocabulary and into dictionaries, making them correct. I actually agree with you in not liking it, but that doesn't make Minty wrong.<

When a "word"'s meaning changes, it should get a new sense/entry in a dictionary's headword, or even its own headword when the sense development is unknown. In any case, these newbs ouht get their own word.

>Yep, sound radiation pressure does indeed work in front of the speaker, and is a net pushing force (barring emergent features, which might be possible at the right object, speaker and sound velocities).<

And as far as I understand it, this force only acts on an object, not on the speaker itself, since it's the result of the high-pressure parts of the sound wave, not originating in the speaker. Go home, Newton's third law!<

Where do you get this bullshit? If there is a net push there must be drag, and there must be conditions where there's a net pull. There seems to be a longer debate as to whether ocean waves drift or not.

>Acoustic levitation apparently is achieved by standing waves, and while a similar system could be used to move objects instead of just holding them, all of that can only be achieved if the wave is reflected somewhere or using a second speaker.

And I am, in fact, a physicist.<

which "that"? and what kind of "fysysyst" are you?

>>3621

>words

Agreed; one way to clarify words and meaning is to make new words where new meaning emerge. But you apparently can't stop people from using words wrong to an extent where it get added to the dictionary.

>sound radiation pressure

Sorry, after reading my wording again my point, as written, was actually wrong: there are regions with net positive and negative (in the direction facing away from the speaker) forces in a sound cone.

What I meant was that the average (over one or more periods) force acting on an object in the sound cone was net positive (and since we're overly exact here, positive is meant as facing away), and thus would move the object away from the speaker. Compare radiation pressure, just with phonons instead of photons.

(Source: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schallstrahlungsdruck ; German, since the English wikipedia seems to be even shorter. More when I've read more papers regarding this subject.)

Again, emergent features, like standing waves, might show different behaviour.

>which "that"?

Hm. I guess the correct word would've been "which" there? I'm no native speaker; mistakes happen. But since we are at criticizing every little thing now, the first "w" in your sentence should be capitalized, I believe. Also the "a" of

>and what kind of "fysysyst" are you?

Still in training. But while I freely admit that I'm still ignorant on many things, in my experience I know and/or am able to infer quite a bunch of stuff, usually more than the typical moron on the internet. Which of course doesn't always make me correct, but often. Acoustics, however, is one of the topics I find hard to grasp.

>>3623

>But you apparently can't stop people from using words wrong to an extent where it get added to the dictionary.<

Population control can stop that. If every retard (whose IQ is below one sigma, 115, 83% of the world) were killed, the lave can actually learn something. The police and public teachers should be dead, and the average college student should survive.

>Sorry, after reading my wording again my point, as written, was actually wrong: there are regions with net positive and negative (in the direction facing away from the speaker) forces in a sound cone.<

The screenshot/animation above is also wrong; the body should rest at a node.

>What I meant was that the average (over one or more periods) force acting on an object in the sound cone was net positive (and since we're overly exact here, positive is meant as facing away), and thus would move the object away from the speaker. Compare radiation pressure, just with phonons instead of photons.<

what "way"? "away" is not a lode (direction). The opposite of "away from" is not "away to"; rather the opposite of "toward" is "froward". If speakers do blow, everywhere should host a blueshift, something I never heard of and couldn't make much propulsion compared to the regular pressure fluctuations. I can't access http://www.sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200015/000020001500A0479085.php.

I also disagree with first-order EM radiation pressure propulsion, but this arsehole John Baez ignored and deleted me:

https://plus.google.com/117663015413546257905/posts/6L2b1B8r7Xt

The Voynich manuscript is in a few Tamil dialects:

https://twitter.com/alysdexia/status/465916019274301440

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1yt8cb;/i_am_stephen_bax_researching_the_voynich/chd3wca.

+John Baez unblock my Autymn D. C. account. I left my arguments on why EM radiation pressure can't do net work or propulsion (https://plus.google.com/117663015413546257905/posts/2niejXnkjKu; in short, there is no net displacement of charges or masses in a wave; then I cited how a radiometer depends on atomic propellant to work.); they sat there for a few days; then apparently you deleted them and then me. If this LightSail (https://plus.google.com/117663015413546257905/posts/e6QEbgyJrqa) doesn't work, as I predict, then you shall be compelled to listen to me.

I don't remember which other problematic comments I posted on; but in that month you still posted on black hole trash which I confuted on Quora (http://www.quora.com/What-role-if-any-do-supermassive-blackholes-play-in-the-formation-of-galaxies/answer/Autymn-Castleton), Wikipedia, and Usenet; you solicited the size of a black hole if earth became one, but the size along with other black hole parameters depend on classical (nonrelativistic) expressions that assume celerity is infinite. If special relativity were factored into these, all black holes and singularities should collapse and they'd be seen as the fictional blunder they are, and scientists, experimentalists and theorists alike, and reporters shall be seen as the liars they are.

"the hoax theory is one popular theory; it could explain the low entropy in the text, lower than any European language. But it hasn't been proven."

Theories are proven by definition.

>Hm. I guess the correct word would've been "which" there? I'm no native speaker; mistakes happen. But since we are at criticizing every little thing now, the first "w" in your sentence should be capitalized, I believe. Also the "a" of<

I don't think they need a standing wave to float, but attenuation and gravity should slide a body down a vertical wave.

Capitalization hasn't forever existed; it's only needed for stress.

Do the websites for Clop and Compounds refuse to load for anyone else, too?

>>3745

No idea what the fuck's going on. Wonder if the server's under attack.

It's back up; access it while you can, because I don't know when or if the attack will resume.

>>3745

http://www.hawkhoststatus.com/services/dallas-tx