Jump to content

Shower thoughts


p1t1o
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

In the Harry Potter franchise,
the Dursley family are actually James and Lily Potters
and the proper, unchanged version of Harry himself from the backup reality.

Yes, real Harry actually was that stupid jerk, and only the Morty's accurate finger flick had blown out of his head all the crap it was full of.
Such tricky example of invigorating transtemporal autotrepanation.

(The mirror was lying. As everyone in Hogwarts.)

Morty didn't kill Harry's parents.
The Harry's imagination created these false memories. 
Dursleys are James and Lilly. The mirror just reflected Harry's imaginary constructs of them.

***

Even more. Probably both Harry and Dudley are not just same person, but two personalities in the same body.

Did you see Dudley alone, without Harry? No. He It appears only together with Harry.
It's his original, dark side, appearing when Harry feels morally unstable.

Also, Dudley is the real Harry's appearance.
The skinny nerd wearing the glasses is how Harry prefers to see himself.
While Dudley is how he looks like in real world.

When Harry gets morally or mentally challenged, his psychological lock weakens, and he starts seeing himself real, thinking that it's his evil tulpa.
That's why "Dudley" always chases and insults Harry. It's his self-destruction part of ego attacks his mind.

***

Hermiona is his friendly tulpa. 
Obviously, Dudley-Harry has an imaginary girlfriend. 
Obviously, both of them can have just imaginary wise girlfriend.
(Non-wise - maybe).

Until Dudley-Harry meets Luna, who is moonstruck in same degree.
Though, it makes to suspect that Luna is a tricky combination of self-idealized Dudley-Harry and Germiona, a super-tulpa.
That's why they are so friendly to each other.

***

The Weasley family are a whole family of imaginary friends of the Dudley-Harry double-personal ego.

All of them are obvious trixters.

Ron is an inferior imaginary trixter. To kick, laugh at, and feel high.

The gingerhead twins are the neutralized rebelled Ron.
When Dudley-Harry feels too high, humiliating the Ron, and gets afraid of getting a kick from him,
the imaginary Strong Ron turns into a pair of friendly super-Rons which calm him and make safe for Dudley-Harry.

At the same time, all three Rons impersonate the parts of Dudley-Harry nature which he finds pathetic.
The Weasley brothers are what Dudley-Harry would like to suppress in his peronality,

Weasley parents are idealized placeholders of James and Lilly. Always friendly, never critical.

The Ginny Weasley is a lowered representation of the Hermiona.
When Dudley-Harry feels that his tulpa (the Hermoina) looks too wise compared to him, he neutralizes her by converting into  the loyal and silent "Ginny".
See, the Ginny always takes his side, even when he looks like a stupid jerk.
That's because the Ginny is his yes-girl kind of tulpa.

***

Also remember the scene with the speaking snake.
The real Dudley-Harry was afraid and fell down. While his imaginary part kept standing and talking to the snake.

The Parseltongue - that's how Dudley-Harry call his personal imaginary speech with things and animals.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's more thought than I put into the entire Harry Potter series at all. I never really found that story all that stimulating, at least as much as everyone else apparently did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, TheSaint said:

I think that's more thought than I put into the entire Harry Potter series at all. I never really found that story all that stimulating, at least as much as everyone else apparently did.

I just watched a bunch of parodies. And just once and on fast-forward - the original. Never read the book.

P.S.
You may be surprised, but in Russian schools they were/are studying parts of it on the literature.

P.P.S.
Of course, I would be for Sapkowski instead.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

I just watched a bunch of parodies. And just once and on fast-forward - the original. Never read the book.

Stay on course. You aren't missing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I keep asking physicist friends this question and they say they’ll get back to me and they never do. 
 

We’re going to run a Bell test with entangled electrons. One of each pair is sent through a low velocity medium, and the other is fed into an accelerator and spun up to some meaningful fraction of the speed of light (presuming this is possible without disentangling them). If these particles are both measured at the same time relative to the source, will they correlate? Or do you have to account for the difference in relativistic time dilation between the two particles? In other words do particles have internal clocks?

Edited by Pthigrivi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are most Rubik's cubes solved or unsolved?

Probably we can assume that the vast majority of Rubik's brand cubes sold get scrambled and don't get solved again for a long time. But there are a few of us who have lots of off-brand cubes, and nearly always store them in the solved position. But while using them, they spend most of their time in the unsolved state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, cubinator said:

Are most Rubik's cubes solved or unsolved?

Probably we can assume that the vast majority of Rubik's brand cubes sold get scrambled and don't get solved again for a long time. But there are a few of us who have lots of off-brand cubes, and nearly always store them in the solved position. But while using them, they spend most of their time in the unsolved state.

For me this would depend upon how much I really want a solved cube on display, the easiest way to solve it is peel the stickers off(If they're still like that) and reapply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, cubinator said:

Are most Rubik's cubes solved or unsolved?

I have a Rubik's cube and a Rubik's link. And right now, both of them are in their natural "solved" state. That is, until my daughter decides she needs to try to solve them herself.

In case anyone forgot:

il_570xN.474103147_778q.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, catloverjerrygarcia said:

For me this would depend upon how much I really want a solved cube on display, the easiest way to solve it is peel the stickers off(If they're still like that) and reapply.

Actually, I think the easiest ways to solve a Rubik's cube would be:

1. Watch a YouTube video about how to solve a Rubik's cube, or,

2. Mail it to @cubinator, return postage paid.

Not necessarily in that order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first way I learned to solve a Rubik’s cubes was to pop a corner off and take it apart, then reassemble it solved. Cuz once a sticker is taken of... ick 

I used to know how to solve a cube, but haven’t in a long time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Go to bed" or "Go to sleep".
I.e. "to intentionally reach some place to have a sleep".

"Fall asleep"
Even when someone is already lying in bed, he anyway falls. Though, not necessary from the bed.

But "to wake up".
I.e. "to change someone's state to 'active'", "to self-alarm".


It sounds like it happens in jungle where the someone seeks for a hidden branch, climbs there, gets disabled (and maybe falls on ground, but usually not), and several hours later jumps up and starts glancing around with a spear in hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...