Hmmm...could it be over on Jun 30, 2026?

 

I saw a police car drive by at 1:33 p.m. today.


That could mean, 13 weeks and 3 days from today.  That's 94 days, i.e., Jun 30.


Starting off from July 30, 2016, when the Bourne movie came out, we get 9 years, 11 months, and 1 day.  I switched from weeks to months.  That spells IKA.  That could be, Akiva, from the Lonely Island, backwards.  Or, it could be a different spelling of Icarus, the figure from Greek mythology.


Does this mean Ikarus dropping Russia?


I think the police were not saying the date.  Nevertheless, it is healthy for me to mentalize this.  As Dr. Steg once said in the hospital, the mind is like a muscle.  Also, the mind is like a nuclear reactor, he said, and the medicine is the coolant.  I think that as my mind gets better at reasoning through this kind of challenge, especially quickly, I will get healthier and feel better.


I think it is still by July 30.  I am sort of looking for other confirmations of this.  I think I had someone signaling me something to that effect the other day, but I forgot what the code thing was.  I think it was the code that made me think it should be Easter.  It might be a day before July 30 that has a significance that I do not understand.


Perhaps it is a day that will be very surprising to the bad guys who are getting arrested, based on some sort of reference to something they know about that I have never heard of.  Maybe it is before July 30.  Maybe it is exactly July 30.  I read that Honduras was arrived at by Christopher Columbus in 1502, on July 30.  That's 524 years ago.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Math Update: My P != NP Proof Might Be Correct!!!!! -- (update, no it's not, see the note at the beginning and the updates near the bottom)

EDIT:  No, this proof is not correct.  See the updates at the bottom for details on why (based on Dr. Zelinsky's comment).  Fortunately, my GLL proof and MSR proofs still appear to be correct. It could be that Joshua Zelinsky's comment actually helps me to complete the proof. The GLL proof appears to be correct, AFAIK. The thing is, the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent --> P != NP" within PA and the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent" as a theorem of ZFC just shows that P != NP is a theorem of PA.  That isn't a contradiction, it's just another step in the proof. I think the striking idea is, P != NP is a theorem of PA, but not of ZFC.  That is what I worked to prove.  AFAIK it is possible for a proposition to be a theorem of PA but not of ZFC.  In particular, PA can be proved consistent from ZFC, so we would think it s possible and even likely that there are some non-theorems of ZFC that are theorems of PA. So this is great!  It l...
Read more

Hello, Texas - A Quick Monopoly Lesson

  So today, I thought I saw some people running around blurting code gestures at me.  One of the codes seemed to say, "Riot for a[buse] v[ictim] time -M".  Oh, M?  M as in Monolith, or M as in Monopoly fan who doesn't get it? Here, Houstonian code-talkers...let me teach you how to play Monopoly, since you are so hungry for free knowledge:  - Make deals with other players that benefit you.  - Offer deals to difficult players that are somewhat beneficial to them, knowing that they might reject.  - Watch which deals other players reject, and identify what *deal types* they are not likely to accept from you or anyone else.  - Be very very careful about your own deals--and behavior--lest you get figured out by your opponents and backed into a corner, with good, beneficial deals being made without you by cunning adversaries who know your every move. There's a poker lesson in there, too, but I don't want to get too educational right now.
Read more

Flash Non-Fiction: James Bond and Masculinity

  This was going to be a longer essay, but I decided to just blurt out my point rather than trying to write well. Basically, I think James Bond movies are good, and the songs are high-quality too, but it sends semi-dangerous messages to men in particular about what it means to be a man.  The Bond character is intransigent, aggressive, violent, and absolutely sure of himself in all cases.  He is portrayed as a big winner--able to date and have sex with beautiful women, almost impossible to kill, and lethal and elite at both armed and unarmed combat. I'm concerned that some men, including my estranged father ASW, have had their sense of morality warped by Bond movies.  They think that this dramatically presented way to be masculine is the only way.  I think that's unhealthy, and when people get the not-so-original idea to "try to be more Bond-like" in their personal lives, that leads to catastrophic conflicts with and major potential for deep pain for people that ...
Read more