quillery

disneyconceptsandstuff:

James Lopez, a veteran Disney animator (The Lion King, Pocahontas, Paperman), is currently trying to raise money for his traditionally animated project Hullabaloo. Hullabaloo is a steampunk short film which Lopez is hoping will help save the cause of 2D animation, and possibly lead to a TV series or film. So, if you’re interested in badass steampunk ladies or traditional animation, may I recommend you give a dollar or two. Hullabaloo's IndieGogo page is over here, visit to donate and learn more! And I’ll conclude with the plot: 

Hullabaloo is the story of Veronica Daring, a brilliant young scientist who returns home from an elite finishing school to find her father—the eccentric inventor Jonathan Daring—missing without a trace! The only clue left behind points Veronica toward Daring Adventures, an abandoned amusement park used by her father to test his fantastical steam-powered inventions. There she discovers a strange girl named Jules, a fellow inventor who agrees to help Veronica in locating her missing father and discovering the secrets of his work.

Together, Veronica and Jules learn that Jonathan Daring has been kidnapped by a mysterious group of influential persons, who seek to use his latest invention for nefarious purposes. These villains are wealthy and influential and neither Veronica nor Jules can stop them openly. But determined to save her father and holding true to the family creed that technology should be used for the good of all, not the greed of some, Veronica assumes the secret identity of “Hullabaloo”, a goggled crusader who uses wits and science to combat evil and oppose the nefarious conspiracy that has taken her father.

"In addition to helping save 2D animation, Hullabaloo aims to encourage girls to explore science and adventure. The film’s two protagonists are both young women and both scientists who use their intellect, wits, and courage to fight greed and corruption."

••••••

2D adventure film with female scientist leads? There’s nothing about this that’s not awesome.

…If the question is whether I think that there is a person who has created Heavens and Earth, and responds to our prayers, then definitely my answer is no, with much certainty.


If the question is whether I believe that “God” is a powerful something in the people, which causes a lot of disasters but also a lot of good, then of course I believe it. In fact, I am extremely curious about religion. I think that we should study what is religion much more than what is done. There is a sort of taboo in this, a sort of respect towards people who “believe in God”, which makes it difficult to understand better.


I think that viewing the “belief in God” just as a bunch of silly superstitions is wrong. The “belief in God” is one form of human religious attitude, and human religious attitude is something very general and universal about our functioning. Something which is important for man, and we have not yet understood.

…you can be great in solving Maxwell’s equations and pray to God in the evening. But there is an unavoidable clash between science and certain religions, especially some forms of Christianity and Islam, those that pretend to be repositories of “absolute Truths.” The problem is not that scientists think they know everything. It is the opposite: scientists know that there are things we simply do not know, and naturally question those who pretend to know. Many religious people are disturbed by this, and have difficulty in coping with it. The religious person says, “I know that God has created light saying, ‘Fiat Lux.’” The scientist does not believe the story. The religious people feel threatened. And here the clash develops. But not all religions are like that. Many forms of Buddhism, for instance, have no difficulty with the continual critical attitude of science. …

Response from an interview with physicist Carlo Rovelli, to the questions: “Do you believe in God?” and “Are science and religion compatible?”

August 21, 2014

…Einstein, Heisenberg, Newton, Bohr… and many … of the greatest scientists of all times … read philosophy, learned from philosophy, and could have never done the great science they did without the input they got from philosophy, as they claimed repeatedly. You see: the scientists that talk philosophy down are simply superficial: they have a philosophy (usually some ill-digested mixture of Popper and Kuhn) and think that this is the “true” philosophy, and do not realize that this has limitations.

Excerpt from an interview with physicist Carlo Rovelli of Aix-Marseille University and the Intitut Universitaire de France.

August 21, 2014

••••••
A beautiful interview, in many ways. Although I understand why it happens to an extent, it’s still baffling to see such an agitated response against philosophy, from some students of science.
Science stemmed from philosophy, from the human desire to understand the world around us. And it is a cycle: science does not only produce technologies, but philosophies as well. When we gain a new understanding of our universe, we also learn how to better respond to nature — how to live better. Philosophy in action.

What is the “mystery of the universe”? There isn’t a “mystery of the universe.” There is an ocean of things we do not know. Many of them we’ll figure out, if we continue to be somewhat rational and do not kill one another first (which is well possible.) There will always be plenty of things that we will not understand, I think, but what do I know? In any case, we are very very very far from any complete comprehension of everything we would like to know.

I have no idea what “absolute truth” means. I think that science is the attitude of those who find funny the people saying they know something is absolute truth. Science is the awareness that our knowledge is constantly uncertain. What I know is that there are plenty of things that science does not understand yet. And science is the best tool found so far for reaching reasonably reliable knowledge.

Responses from an interview with physicist Carlo Rovelli, to the questions: “Can physics—or science in general—ever completely solve the mystery of the universe?” and “Can science attain absolute truth?”

August 21, 2014

I found physics, where … revolutions succeed. I got in love with it. It has been a passion that hasn’t ended. … [Physics] has been much better than I expected. Infinite fun and enthusiasm. Investigating the secrets of the world. Thinking things that nobody else has thought before. Great adventures in thinking. Great companions of travel. Fantastic.

Excerpts from an interview with physicist Carlo Rovelli of Aix-Marseille University and the Intitut Universitaire de France.

August 21, 2014

I Contain MultitudesOur bodies are a genetic patchwork, possessing variation from cell to cell. Is that a good thing?
By: Kat McGowan    Art by: Olena ShmahaloAugust 21, 2014

Your DNA is supposed to be your blueprint, your unique master code, identical in every one of your tens of trillions of cells. It is why you are you, indivisible and whole, consistent from tip to toe.But that’s really just a biological fairy tale. In reality, you are an assemblage of genetically distinctive cells, some of which have radically different operating instructions.

I Contain Multitudes
Our bodies are a genetic patchwork, possessing variation from cell to cell. Is that a good thing?

By: Kat McGowan   
Art by: Olena Shmahalo
August 21, 2014

Your DNA is supposed to be your blueprint, your unique master code, identical in every one of your tens of trillions of cells. It is why you are you, indivisible and whole, consistent from tip to toe.

But that’s really just a biological fairy tale. In reality, you are an assemblage of genetically distinctive cells, some of which have radically different operating instructions.

In a feverish dream, you hatch a theory that to make the largest chewing gum bubble imaginable, you need to blow it up so that the radius is increasing at a constant rate of 6 millimeters per second.

Fred the spherical cow is happily grazing on cubical grass pellets. He grows in volume at a rate of 6 cubic feet per day.

Coursera, Calc 1 as taught by Jim Fowler

Well, yeah. Problems like this probably will lead to some screwed up dreams.

wildcat2030

wildcat2030:

A More Pseudonymous Internet
-
From ephemeral publishing apps to the abandoned Google “real names” policy, a push to revive relative namelessness online.

••••••

Excellent article. Some excerpts:

they search for safe spaces where they can … anonymously practice new ways of thinking and being. These interactions offer them freedom and distance from their existing relationships. They eventually use the experiences, relationships, and practices cultivated through their Elastic Self in other areas of their life.

+

I was finding myself on the Internet learning skills that would be useful both as a professional and a human offline. My ability to be an effective creator was hugely shaped by writing popular fan fiction and running side-project businesses in virtual worlds. Researchers have also found pseudonymous games to be great environments for training leadership skills.

The above is hilarious to me right now. Just the other day I was talking to someone about Neopets. Yeah, Neopets. It’s a ridiculous thing to try to explain: a website built around fantasy creatures helped me learn valuable skills like marketing and business-management, and even helped build an international network of friends and business prospects (some of whom I’ve encountered recently, over a decade later, in person and on other sites).

“companies and institutions often misinterpret the meaning of people’s social lives, codifying it in a way that forces people into static relationships that don’t reflect the fluid nature of actual relationships.

+

Commentators began suggesting real-name usage would make the Internet a clean and civil place. (These theories are contradicted by evidence.) Unsurprisingly, some people who have advocated for real-name usage are affiliated with data-gathering social platforms.

+

Can pseudonyms and anonymity be used to hurt others? Obviously, yes. As a woman on the Internet, I’ve encountered my share of nastiness.

There’s nothing about this article that gives the writer away as a woman, until she mentions it. Once it’s out there, certain people will judge what you say by your gender, and it’s neither fun nor interesting. Although I use my name here on tumblr, there are other sites on which I still use pseudonyms. I’ve been called “man”, “dude”, “12-year-old boy”, “sir”, and “neckbeard”, among other terms usually reserved for humans with a set of testicles, and know of other women who’ve had the same experience. People still think there are few women in discussions of gaming and STEM, but I wonder how many of us are simply hidden, just because we don’t want to deal with the BS?

Anyway, I agree with the author: anonymity and pseudonymity are an important kind of freedom, worth fighting for going forward.

uvec
uvec:

MANY MOONS HANDLE IT!

••••••
Beautiful image. However, the link above is broken (dead Deviantart page), and was made invisible in the permalink, by the original poster’s layout. The artist’s name was neither in the tags, nor text. Had to sift through cycles and cycles of tumblr and pinterest pages before finally noticing the artist's subtle watermark in the corner. Apparently the image was also rotated 90° clockwise, somewhere along the way.
Not saying this was intentional obfuscation. Seems like the OP (uvec) tries to credit people. But, it isn’t helpful that the content source is listed as the OP’s tumblr. Unless the OP is the artist (maybe? no telling info to know for sure), this is incorrect.
So guys, unless you don’t care, watermark your stuff. Small & unnoticeable is fine — less of a chance of rude people removing it, that way.
All that said, this is evidently "Many Moons Handle It" by Ernest Tang.

"A family of moons orbiting the gas giant of Sunatta. We have a moon orbiting a moon orbiting a bigger moon orbiting the gas giant. All of these moons have been paraterraformed by the type II civilization that lives here. … I used textures from http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/, Nasa Visible Earth and NSGS.”

uvec:

MANY MOONS HANDLE IT!

••••••

Beautiful image. However, the link above is broken (dead Deviantart page), and was made invisible in the permalink, by the original poster’s layout. The artist’s name was neither in the tags, nor text. Had to sift through cycles and cycles of tumblr and pinterest pages before finally noticing the artist's subtle watermark in the corner. Apparently the image was also rotated 90° clockwise, somewhere along the way.

Not saying this was intentional obfuscation. Seems like the OP (uvec) tries to credit people. But, it isn’t helpful that the content source is listed as the OP’s tumblr. Unless the OP is the artist (maybe? no telling info to know for sure), this is incorrect.

So guys, unless you don’t care, watermark your stuff. Small & unnoticeable is fine — less of a chance of rude people removing it, that way.

All that said, this is evidently "Many Moons Handle It" by Ernest Tang.

"A family of moons orbiting the gas giant of Sunatta.
We have a moon orbiting a moon orbiting a bigger moon orbiting the gas giant.

All of these moons have been paraterraformed by the type II civilization that lives here.

… I used textures from http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/, Nasa Visible Earth and NSGS.”

infinity-imagined
Clothes are people’s extended skin, wheels extended feet, camera and telescope extended eyes. Our technological creations are extrapolations of the bodies that our genes build. In this way, we can think of technology as our extended body. If technology is an extension of humans, it is not an extension of our genes but our minds.

Technology is the exoskeleton of ideas.

Kevin Kelly (via inthenoosphere)

••••••

On the same page with Kevin Kelly.

infinity-imagined
Symbolic representation of the Universe as a self-excited system brought into being by ‘self-reference’. The universe gives birth to communicating participators. Communicating participators give meaning to the universe…With such a concept goes the endless series of receding reflections one sees in a pair of facing mirrors.

J.A. Wheeler
(via n9nlinear)

••••••

Wiki:

John Archibald Wheeler (July 9, 1911 – April 13, 2008) was an American theoretical physicist who was largely responsible for reviving interest in general relativity in the United States after World War II. Wheeler also worked with Niels Bohr in explaining the basic principles behind nuclear fission. … He is also known for … for coining the term “quantum foam"…

olena

olena:

Hank Pellissier { writes }:

Metaphorically, for me, the “nakedness” of mental transparency is identical to physical nudity. The complex data of our yearning craniums won’t be shrouded any longer, won’t be buried and disguised under fabricated obstacles and artifice.

••••••

But, naked isn’t free.

Can I climb mountains, naked? Can I travel to outer space, naked? Can I “be myself”, naked? Definitely not, definitely not, and no, I don’t think so.

Whatever appendages we choose to attach to ourselves daily or permanently, whatever artifice we handle and live with and use and surround ourselves with… it’s our costume, our armor, our shelter, our extremities, our transformation into what we are and everything we’re capable of being, would like to be, or are becoming.

I want to be buried, disguised, fabricated, obfuscated, clarified, extended through artifice.