# How does the world work?



## isfpisfp (Sep 10, 2017)

I will leave this open and ambiguous. Please be as thorough as possible to better the entire website with your wisdom thanks


----------



## Pifanjr (Aug 19, 2014)

Miraculously.


----------



## Mephi (Jun 10, 2015)

Very carefully...sometimes.


----------



## Cal (Sep 29, 2017)

Money


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

There is no thorough response to an ambiguous question.


----------



## 469090 (Jun 26, 2017)

Mathematically.


----------



## MortySmith (Nov 11, 2017)

its like a dick sometimes its hard sometimes its not.


----------



## Baracuda902 (Mar 26, 2017)

The world is an unfair, unbalanced game involving crucial early game strategies and many lucky dice rolls. It is harsh, it is unfair, but it is fun when you understand it--or not. It can be fun when you don't understand so long as you get what you like. Here are the rules, here are the pieces, here is the board, have fun. What differentiates this game of life to The Game of Life is that the Game of Life requires you to win, and in life, you don't have to get first place to "win."


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

It doesn’t.


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

From 9 to 5, trying to make a living.


----------



## NiceGuyDeclan (Dec 4, 2017)

You're looking for a thorough answer to an thoroughly ambiguous question, which isn't fair.

Please define your terms. What do you mean by "the world," and what do you mean by "work?"


----------



## Temizzle (May 14, 2017)

The world seems like a platform for the business of life. 
Life forms explosively -- many variants emerge by random mutation like a shotgun blast but only few survive dependent on the ever-changing circumstances of their environment. 
But life has a desire not only to survive but to thrive. 
There is a natural flow, a circle of life, where each species within an ecosystem is a giver and a taker simultaneously and there's a renewable, sustainable, balance. 

Then there is the human condition which thrives on fear and thus the consequent desire to dominate, conquer, and expand for power. Power gives control and control increases your chances of survival. 

And so we play the game of life.


----------



## zekzar (Jul 9, 2017)

Better without us.
and
It doesn't.

That's all you need to know.
Here's a simple question I thought of the other day while viewing a meme about the meaning of life.
"If so many people have died without a proper answer to the infamous question concerning the meaning of life, what makes you think you're so important as to finding one for yourself or for everyone else who has died or will die?"
The simple answer is that you're not that important. The universe doesn't care what you think.

Now to contradict myself.
It works when people have decent morals. You don't need a meaning of life to have a positive influence on society. Educate yourself on meaningful topics. Don't remain ignorant to feelings regarding yourself or others. Always try to find a middle ground when in a heated argument.
Your life here is temporary, make it count.


----------



## Vain (Dec 25, 2016)

I have no idea.

But, if I wanted to answer another question, which is: "How to work in this world?" (=to achieve things, to succeed.)
I would write: probability. 
Use probability. Know as many opportunities and options as you can, and someday, if you have calculated everything right it will work.

(There's a calculation of the world\universe etc. we just can not know it. Like, some endless cause and effect loop\system.)


----------



## Alomoes (Oct 5, 2014)

Oh boy. This is a big one. Well, time to disappear for several years. 

So, the world is just but one's perception of it. So it is what you see. Epistemologists say that these are judgements. Descartes says I think therefore I am. That is a judgement. It can be said that the act of thinking is the act of judging. The act of perception is a judgement. 

We can act upon our judgements, as most people do. Being of the strategist mindset, I tend to go towards long, generalized plans. For example, get elected president. I gather a ton of information to find the statistically ideal time to run, the statistically ideal party to run as. I may win, but probably not, as my personality is very much non-standard. To say I am counter-culture is an understatement. So, as such, I will need outside support. Because I have problems doing things that are judged inefficient, I have not perused specific skills, mainly those dealing with the social norms. To put it bluntly, I would do better in the court of Queen Elizabeth than in an Italian restaurant in New York. 

This is because I do not care about money, and I like things that are good and cheap. Information is cheap. Practically free. As such, I take in as much as possible, and attempt to remember as much as I can. This means having a VERY organized mind. Specifically, such that I use hashing to ascribe things in pairs. I associate gained knowledge by relation in remembering. For example, remembering my phone number ascribes xxx to ccc to vvv. 

Oh yeah, I forgot, facts are judgements in Epistemology. 

I am saying this because the world is all about judgements, and those are my judgements. Here is a new one. The only one who can judge is God. We judge. 

In practicality, the fact that we are judging means that we are computers. Computers cannot work without either RAM or a tape. The tape is probably reality. The RAM is probably just a tape that is made to look really random. Multiple tapes can be run at the same time, and it works. 

The fact that this tape exists might mean that the environment exists. It is unknown. It is an assumption to assume so. I do make that assumption, which is why I am here speaking to you. I also do not. I plan for both occurrences. I am also in the moment trying to understand that I should live in the moment. Those Humanistic psychologists. My god are they annoying. If you don't remember history, you'll just loop. If you don't plan for the future, it'll suck. And if you don't live in the moment, you'll become a hollow shell, debating every move internally, taking every criticism to heart, and switching between periods of great impulse and great lack of impulse. I'm getting out though. 

Anyways, it should be known that this is how the world works. Now, I shall talk about the tape. 

There is on this tape a thing called the universe. This is everything. You can create a universe inside this universe such that there are infinite universes. As such, there are infinite universes. A universe is equivalent to a group. They are not equal. You can have equal and equivalent. Equivalent might be equal to equal, but that is not proven. Equivalent goes a step ahead. It says it is like something, such that it has something extra. A group is like a universe, but it can have not everything in it. 

Continuing on, in the universe defined is stuff. Stuff is something in the universe. It can be partitioned into groups. Partitioning is the act of assigning groups; Partitioned groups do not overlap. Groups can, partitioned groups may not. 

So, carrying on, stuff in the universe most familiar to me, the one that is of the senses, we get several kinds. A kind is equivalent to a group. Kinds are partitioned. Kinds are also not partitioned. It is a paradox. For example, we have fermions, which includes protons, neutrons, quarks, that stuff. Then we have Anti-Matter, which includes the Anti-Proton, Anti-Neutron, so on and so forth. I believe those could be force to follow the Fermi-Dirac statistics, making them fermions. However, kinds are partitioned, therefore we cannot have a kind that is both anti-matter and fermion. 

There's more, I'm just unloading a semester's worth of discrete math. Probably wrong on the Fermi-Dirac stats, I just looked at the picture. Looked like there were particles not mixed, going to particles mixed. The wording was heavy math, I suck at math. They kind of defined it by functions, which is a quite horrible way to define things. A function is a named rule. So, for example, the function of drawing. Functions have rules which I feel are arbitrary, but that's just me. A function must be an input to an output. 

Hey, you know, it isn't that hard, they're just using kinematics. I know that. Ah shoot friction. Not the friction. Okay, brevity is over. 

So mu. It's friction. There is a weird thing where the universe is slowly canceling itself, I think. I don't know. That's what Einstein said, well, I don't know. But yeah, that's the big crunch. Good news is that while this process happens, relative time will change. As such, relatively, the universe looks stable. I mean, depends on who you are, where you are, and what you're doing, but hey. Oh, and for some reason, the universe tends to explode randomly. Again, I don't know. Who knows? 

So, uh, yeah. Oof. My brother is a pleb. Anyways. Back to my thing. 

Uh, anyways, you can see this in black holes, sometimes light gets out. So, I guess I'll talk about light. 

There is a lot of debate on whether light is a particle, information, or what. A lot of people say it is actually information. This is an interesting theory, because it implies that the universe is really just a simulicron. This feeds the argument of above. I believe light has properties of a particle that moves in an oscillating pattern. The force of this pattern can be measured. Also, do know, the speed of light is not fixed, thus implying further that it is an extremely fast particle behaving on strange patterns. Light does get effected by electromagnetic fields. I do not know if this implies a charge. Electrons can also be triggered to release energy when given light and vice versa. This implies light is electricity. E=MC^2 whatever. So uh yeah. Cool. Light is equivalent or can be converted to electricity. I can see it. The amount of energy in an electron determines both the shape and the amount of valence electrons. They pretty much form a bridge in solids, or keep order in liquids, then breaking order in a liquid, forming bubbles and turning to gas. 

The way liquids break and form gases is described in thermodynamics. You'll want to look at boiling water, and then boiling oil, and then whatever else. You can see. It forms pockets of semi-randomly distributed air. These pockets are less dense than the liquid and thus float. 

So, now how does the reverse occur. Air forms pockets, and they are more dense and they fall. Freezing is about the same way. 

There are probably exceptions to this rule. I don't know of a liquid that is less dense than a gas. I'll go look it up. Yeah, there are no examples. I'm think of something like a foam that is really cohesive, but really sparse. Like the nucleuses would have to be very far away from each other. Probably an odd idea. Oh, and the number of valence electrons would probably need to be high. Oh. We can do this already. Magnetism with a frog. Frog floats. And yes, that would be about right. Magnetism is kind of like giving extra electrons, I guess. You can do this with a human body. Hey, works. Don't ruin my fun by saying, that isn't lowering the density. Let me have this. I guess you could also increase the density of air. That'd work too. Fill it with charcoal or whatever. 

Anyways. Yeah, good enough. I could do economics, but eh. Too much extroversion. I really need to reread my notes. I've probably said some good stuff here that I just think about regularly with no conscious thought to how important it is. Pretty much all the important stuff is negligible. 

Oh yeah, I probably butchered how you define a kind. Hey, semantics is not my thing. I could care less on whether it is labeled potato or pototo. Works.


----------



## shazam (Oct 18, 2015)

It's run by people and if you're nice you 9et free shit :glee: seriously


----------



## desire machine (Jan 13, 2015)

the way the world works is there is an outer crust sitting on top of a very hot gooey cheesy center


----------



## desire machine (Jan 13, 2015)

NiceGuyDeclan said:


> You're looking for a thorough answer to an thoroughly ambiguous question, which isn't fair



if you think things need to be fair, I don't think you have a very good grasp of how the world works


----------



## blackpants (May 3, 2017)

we are all controlled by these ****** 1% elites. they own the biggest bank, financial institution. once you own the world's wealthiest, you can control the government.. so basically, government owns us, but ofcourse there's these set of rules and standards, who created that? who standardize that? those elites. 
when one country is not an ally of these 1% elite, they will create war on them. they will make them look bad on the media, and theyre the heroes. 
they brainwash the majority of population through media, education curriculum, faking the history, galaxy, etc. 
they feed our minds with false information. those false information is necessary to keep their goal. to have control over the world. 

etc.


----------



## blackpants (May 3, 2017)

also, religion plays an important role in controlling the masses. > because its easier to manipulate people through emotions


----------

