I'm sure it can, we just forget how to do it right. Like this got some "Kim Jung Un" vibes, of putting two water droplets together, and thinking he proved 1 + 1 = 1. It's 1 x 1. Three water droplets it's 1 x 1 x 1. And it works in base 1, like Heron's formula, which some things the number gets distorted when exponentiated. There... physics problem solved. Geez people are going backward these days.

Like no offense, but it's the same as adding a new dimension to a cube. You have one line, then another, then another. The whole cube equals 1. Adding three water droplets together, you're multiplying it, essentially. If you took the dimensions within it--and this is beyond my grasp--you could create a formula that describes the augmentation of the droplet. That's generally what happens when you get into more advanced geometry, is the number is defined by equalities.

So, physicists are probably wrong, and they made a huge and absurd leap of conjecture, based on the fact that "Nah nah nah nah boo boo, I just don't want it to be true."

Like, generally, shapes are defined by formulas, and how they interact with each other is its own geometry. You could use this same notion to solve P Versus NP, too, to look at the shapes, and work out conclusions based on geometric principles, or define new geometric principles. But, physics is generally geometry. Gravity, for instance, is quadratic--perfectly--and all physics works off of geometry. And maybe the problem is too much advanced physics is based in specious and non extant substance, that it's basically imaginary at this point. Meaning you'll have to throw most of it out, and observe things through their geometric relations. I'm not saying I can do this... but there's people who can, and that's what work in physics should be, is looking at the reality of something, and forming shapes through equations to describe the patterns they observe. If you can't, then it just doesn't exist. Maybe at a Quantum level math begins to break down... but that even has some aspect of number to it. But that's because it's basically random bursts of energy, which can only be measured through their appearance and frequency.

My faith, personally, sees Wicked Witches, and knows they often get the power structure, and nothing uproots them. So, my faith isn't one that expects life to go swimmingly, or get me what I want. As I know there are real forces, and God's not always going to directly act on someone's behalf. As there can be chariots of iron in the valley. There was one moment while reading it, where I saw the Winkies were freed from slavery, and counterpointed it with Exodus, where the Jews wanted to return to Egypt, and I realized that the latter is the actual state of man, if we're not being sentimental. And that's one reason why the Bible is so credible, is that it actually explains human nature, and really confronts the theodicy without any sentimentality or illusions.

It's obvious Frank Baum is critiquing religion, and not in a bad way. He's just saying religion is a way to get what you want out of life, but it doesn't do anything real. And he's counterplaying it with the fact that magic doesn't belong in the real world. Basically, elevating scientific materialism over supernatural explanations, but faith is benign, if it gets people what they truly want, as it was always in them to begin with.

Chess is the most beautiful game in history. All aspects of human intelligence are found over the board. Memory, creativity, tactics, psychology... Like you can go 50 moves deep into an opening, or just blow it on the first five turns, and do some amazing sacrifice, or set up a tactical position that forces your opponent to do something in three turns. It's a brilliant game. And being only 64 squares, and completely visible--both players have complete information--it's truly a meeting of minds.

Well every lie is made truth by scholars. Guns jammed in Vietnam because of ammunition malfunctions, not dirt. Christians were never persecuted in Rome or Europe. Math is a Western Concept. Truth is your truth, no one else's. Everything we read, we get to say what it means, and nobody's opinion is less valid than another's. And then they enforce this through accreditation processes. Almost to say, if you're going to publish a serious article, you have to do so in bad faith, and lie or disrupt the tradition. Which further gets bolstered, because no new works of literature or important ideas are allowed to get light, and history can only be analyzed correctly once, and all afterward it's plagiarism.

If anyone wants to know what living with Schizoaffective Disorder is like, just imagine you feeling like you're on the Truman Show all the time. Replace actors with spies, kings and queens possessing your friends and family, and then add delusions about mind reading and that, all the shows you watch on television are real, and just in alternate universes... you can see how reality is ripped from you. But then there's no door to a real world, just one far worse than the one you live in now... it's a terrible disease.