This is what He wanted.

It’s certainly possible that sayings of other people were later attributed to him, but to really make this case you’d need to have quotations that were attributed to multiple sources, including him, if you see what I mean. Absent that, it could be true, but there’s no particular reason to believe it.

There are enough specific biographical details about Jesus of Nazareth to make it likely that there’s a specific, real central figure. For example, the fact that he was from Nazareth was a problem for his early followers (it didn’t match the Messianic prophecies), which is why they invented the odd story of the census, so that they could claim he’d been born in Bethlehem, the hometown of King David, from whom Jesus was supposedly descended. That seems unlikely to have happened if there hadn’t been a real, central historical figure.

Also, none of the early non-Christian sources claim he wasn’t real or that he was a composite, which they surely would have done if there was any doubt on the matter.

I agree with you that Jesus wasn’t God, who doesn’t exist, and that there were no miracles, which are impossible. However, this is not the same thing as saying that there’s no evidence for the existence of Jesus, the Jewish apocalyptic preacher.

The earliest documents about Jesus, such as the Pauline Epistles, were written by people who knew people who knew him. In a mostly illiterate society 2,000 years ago, this is about as good as evidence gets. It’s also the exact same kind of evidence as a journalist or researcher writing an account based on interviews with people. This was how, e.g, Herodotus wrote his histories. When Herodotus says ‘A guy rode a dolphin once’ we dismiss that. But we don’t say ‘The people in the Histories didn’t exist, except those for whom there’s physical evidence, which is about three of them, not including the author’. We do much the same with Jesus and the miracles.

If the Apostles had wanted, for some reason, to make up a guy, that would have been risky. Other people would have just said, ‘That guy didn’t exist’. If they had anyway decided to make up a guy, they’d have invented someone who actually fulfilled the Jewish propehcies of the Messiah, instead of inventing Jesus, who obviously didn’t. This suggests they didn’t invent him, which strengthens the plausibility of the evidence we do have.

A third way of looking at this is to ask if there are any comparable figures, religious founders from the historic era, who we now think were wholly made up in the way you’re suggesting. But there aren’t. The Buddha, Confucius, Mohammed, Zoroaster - they all certainly existed. Indeed, I can’t think of any figures form the time period who were actually imaginary.

Dinosaurs aren’t people.

No. But physical proof is not the standard we use for determining someone’s historical existence.

It sounds like a dial tone to me, with a lot of fuzz. Could be a pager, as doctors used to use them a lot.

That is true, but I did find a lot of people on Twitter and Reddit who I could have productive and interesting disagreements with, even though I naturally mostly followed and subscribed to people and things I did agree with.

Not really interested in discussing things with fascists, but I’ve rarely seen anyone here who’s to the right of, like, a milquetoast social democrat.

I don’t think there is one, unfortunately. I agree that lack of ideological diversity is a problem with the Fediverse in general, but it’s a problem that likely won’t go away unless the Fediverse becomes mainstream.

Not sure how accurate this is, but in The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco, some monks stay up all night chanting so that they can wake up the other monks for morning prayers. So, the night monks chant a Hail Mary X number of times, and that takes them Y amount of time.

I think you can simulate an infinite number, in a sense, but my issue is whether you can create infinite numbers, even hypothetically, in a simulation.

We simulate Pi all the time, for example. But that simulation of Pi is not Pi. A circle generated by simulated-Pi can only be described with Pi itself, i.e., outside the simulation in a space which does contain infinite numbers.

I have to admit that I don’t know much about fractals. I have two main questions about this:

1. Are fractals reaaly infinite? I’ve heard the coastline of Britain described as fractal, but I’m sure it’s not infinite in the sense I understand. As I say, I don’t know much about fractals so I may have misunderstood something here.

2. If fractals are or can be infinite, do computer simulations of fractals actually create fractals of the infinite kind or are they a type of approximation?

The existence of infinite numbers suggests that the power increase required to simulate our universe wouldn’t be a small step up in power usage, but an infinite one!

But no simulation within our Universe could be infinitely complex, which the Universe itself seems to be (e.g., as other people have pointed out, irrational numbers). If it is a simulation, then there must be another infinitely complex universe running it. Two infinitely complex universes seems like one too many.

This isn’t a strict proof, but Occam’s razor applies here.

If we claim the Universe is a simulation, we’re supposing, on no evidence whatsoever, that there’s a whole other unknown universe running our Universe. That certainly makes us guilty of multiplying entities beyond necessity!

I’ve been cycling all over the place since I was a kid and I’ve never had a bike stolen. Either I’ve got lucky or my approach is a good one!

The standard advice in the UK is to have two locks, at least one of which should be a good D-lock. Two locks are twice as good as one, because breaking two locks takes twice as long as breaking one, and thieves generally want to be able to steal bikes very quickly.

By a ‘good lock’, I mean in short, an expensive and usually very heavy lock. I have a couple of D-locks for taking out with me and a couple of very heavy chain locks that I keep for locking my bike up at home. I only take the chain locks out if I’m unsure about where to lock my bike, because they’re so heavy as to be barely worth the hassle!

Ideally, a lock should be secured around a frame and a wheel, and then to an immoveable object. So, extending that idea slightly, the ideal place to secure two locks is one around each wheel and the frame. I personally find that this is often difficult to achieve in real life. But, again, that’s where having two locks comes in: a bike that’s secured to a bikerack with one lock and has the rear wheel imobilised with another lock is difficult to steal.

Regardless of lock type and placement, the best places to secure a bike are those that either have their own security or have lots of foot traffic. Thieves are less likely to operate where there are lots of potential witnesses.

Good luck! Bike theft is sadly common but it shouldn’t put you off cycling if you’re going to be smart about security, which it sounds like you are.

Try the Rite of AshkEnte from the Discworld novels, see if you can summon Death himself.

experience fear and thrill of of overcoming it

Riffing off this idea slightly, but I strongly recommend lead climbing. Perfect combo of fear factor - you fall a lot - with limited risk of actually injuring yourself - you’re attached to a rope!

Lots of bigger workplaces actually have some sort of private organisation you can basically vent to and ask advice from, so that might be a good idea place to start. The whole point of these is that they’re totally anonymous, so you basically cannot get any blowback from talking to them.

You can also speak to your boss if you have a good relationship with them. Just explain as neutrally as possible that you’re finding it a little difficult to work with this particular co-worker. You don’t need to ask them to do anything specific, just be honest that it’s difficult. They might be able to either bring it up with your co-worker (keeping you anonymous, of course), that other people are finding their behaviour offputting, or just arrange it so that you don’t have to work together.

I eventually just gave up and started buying expensive notebooks. The cheap ones always fell apart before I finished them, so at least this way I get to the end!