666 = 777?
Now on to the controversial part ;)
I've wondered for a while about the natural order of our world. How I know it to come to be, and how everyone is the perfect card to be played into a new hand. If you imagine a three dimensional pie chart (Like in Excel or something), imagine the world in the beginning based on how many choices graphically represented as slices to that pie chart. Each time someone makes a decision, the pies divide by how many possible outcomes of that decision there could be. Moreover, these choices can be represented factually by unnatural interactions within nature, as in some form of proof that sentient life was aware of something, and interacted with nature accordingly. Inside each of those pies, you can see a world in action, constantly dividing on itself in a purely imaginative way.
Now, if I may dissect that bit of information to properly convey a question, let's go over a few things that modify this model to extreme hell. First, one has to assume that everything began from one root standpoint, and whatever you see in that beginning you understand completely how any one difference between "slices of pie", per se, is made and why. That concept proves our sense of logic, or at least mine.
Now on to interactions. One can safely assume that there's not just 2 different outcomes to each interaction, as is the case with making a yes or no decision. While many interactions can be broken to multiple yes or no things, the outcome is the most important, and outcomes in that manner can be ranged in hundreds to trillions, all from one interaction. I'll get to this part in a minute, but what if the simple action of stepping, or breathing at the right time causes a catastrophic event? Some threshold is crossed and chaos erupts, creating numerous possibilities. Point being, our environment relies heavily on what came before the first interaction, and is molded by each different occurrence.
Now, to boggle the mind even more, what if there are multiple starting points? How can that possibly have anything to do with anything, right? Well, take it this way: If a group of people, just for shits and giggles, created a theory about the beginning of a fictional universe, they could draw an infinite number of universes just by themselves. We could learn SO much just from doing that about ourselves. THAT, my friends, is true knowledge, no matter what frame of reference you create to do it.
So if the starting point I'm thinking of is true, then that means all we have done, experienced, learned about, generally interacted with is pure natural selection. And what we believe in is entirely natural, and not without logical purpose. I can already see many people saying "OH I DON'T GET IT, WTF MAN?! THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION!", so here's the kicker;
Using this logical method, what can we assume about the antichrist?
The ability to speak clearly, succinctly, and powerfully is easier than you think
The ability to communicate effectively can make or break a person's assessment of your intelligence, competence, and authenticity.
The results come from a 15-year study that used ultrasound scans to track blood vessels in middle-aged adults starting in 2002.
- The study measured the stiffness of blood vessels in middle-aged patients over time.
- Stiff blood vessels can lead to the destruction of delicate blood vessels in the brain, which can contribute to cognitive decline.
- The scans could someday become a widely used tool to identify people at high risk of developing dementia and Alzheimer's.
What defines a dark horse? The all-important decision to pursue fulfillment and excellence.
When we first set the Dark Horse Project in motion, fulfillment was the last thing on our minds. We were hoping to uncover specific and possibly idiosyncratic study methods, learning techniques, and rehearsal regimes that dark horses used to attain excellence. Our training made us resistant to ambiguous variables that were difficult to quantify, and personal fulfillment seemed downright foggy. But our training also taught us never to ignore the evidence, no matter how much it violated our expectations.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.