What "The End" Will Look Like: My Guess

 

I think it is over by July 2.  It's probably not exactly on July 2, but it's by that time.  Either the DOJ told me, or the DOJ will never tell me.


I think what's getting me is...what will "the end" look like?  Will there be a collection of 10 or so FBI vehicles showing up here, and an FBI agent will get out of the car and walk up to me and tell me what happened?  Somehow, that feels unlikely.


I bet what it will be is:  I will see the arrests on the news, and it will be a big story that has some aspect to it that I wouldn't have predicted, like the involvement of a famous person I've heard of who will get arrested.  I suspect the FBI won't talk to me, which is basically fine as long as it ends, and after which ever court officials in Virginia get arrested, someone will email me telling me that the charges against me have been dropped.


It could be that I will hear from a sympathetic relative who can help me with money and lodging for a couple of months.  Alternatively, I might be homeless for a little while.  If my parents are in jail, they are not likely to continue to pay for my treatment here at Monarch.


It could be, also, that my differential equations research was correct, and that I will be paid the $1 million for that at some point.  Maybe that will make the news too.  I don't know.  I'm not going to worry about it...although it's very important for me to be on medications, I'm not all that scared of homelessness.  I would pack my stuffed animals, my computer, and my iPhone, and take my wallet and Pex card with me if I had to leave Monarch without anywhere else to go.  If I die of homelessness, that would be less bad to me than being convicted of a crime...I believe I would come back to life in the future anyway.

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