ELIMINATED - Julianne Moore in Still Alice - 20.4% of all votes. Still Alice was released in 2014. The film had one win, Best Actress for Moore, at the 87th Academy Awards. Moore was selected for Best Actress of the year in a lineup that also included Marion Cotillard in Two Days, One Night, Felicity Jones in The Theory of Everything, Rosamund Pike in Gone Girl and Reese Witherspoon in Wild. Moore also garnered wins at the BAFTAs, Critics' Choice Awards, Golden Globes and SAGs for her performance as Alice Howland.
Feel free to use the comments as an area for discussion. Votes will only be accepted through this Google Form.
• Charlize Theron as Aileen Wuornos (Monster)
• Marion Cotillard as Édith Piaf (La Vie en Rose)
• Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers (Black Swan)
• Cate Blanchett as Jasmine Francis (Blue Jasmine)
• Brie Larson as Joy Newsome (Room)
• Frances McDormand as Mildred Hayes (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri)
• Olivia Colman as Queen Anne (The Favourite)
• Michelle Yeoh as Evelyn Wang (Everything Everywhere All at Once)
• Emma Stone as Bella Baxter (Poor Things)
RANKING:

1. Julianne Moore as Alice Howland (Still Alice)
   
2. Helen Mirren as Queen Elizabeth II (The Queen)
   
3. Hilary Swank as Maggie Fitzgerald (Million Dollar Baby)
   
4. Emma Stone as Mia Dolan (La La Land)
   
5. Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf (The Hours)
   
6. Jennifer Lawrence as Tiffany Maxwell (Silver Linings Playbook)
   
7. Kate Winslet as Hanna Schmitz (The Reader)
   
8. Halle Berry as Leticia Musgrove (Monster's Ball)
   
9. Jessica Chastain as Tammy Faye Bakker (The Eyes of Tammy Faye)
   
10. Julia Roberts as Erin Brockovich (Erin Brockovich)
    
11. Reese Witherspoon as June Carter (Walk the Line)
    
12. Frances McDormand as Fern (Nomadland)
    
13. Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher (The Iron Lady)
    
14. Renée Zellweger as Judy Garland (Judy)
    
15. Sandra Bullock as Leigh Anne Tuohy (The Blind Side)
    

TLDR; I conducted a lot of tests based on community feedback after my first batch of test results (and recommendations) were perceived as controversial. I ran additional simulations and used chi square analysis to see if any equipment stood out.

• The polearm was observed to be the best except in very niche circumstances, where it still does well in general
• Assassin's Rags appears to be the best general armor in the game for melee
• Heavy Armor consistently loses to White Plate & Assassin's Rags
• In field battles you're probably better off not using ranged weapons at all
• For top tier characters KLR limbs remove the need to prioritize a shirt with high coverage; reducing damage to the chest & stomach may be more important even if limbs are less unprotected
• Crossbows don't appear to do very well in field battles

Introduction
Assertions about the best equipment in Kenshi are innumerable, but few of them are driven by data. A previous post based on repeated combat simulations and statistical analysis indicated that the Polearm outperformed other community favorites, sometimes by a remarkable margin.
Additionally, the recommendation to use crab armor was challenged and members pointed that other armor types not included in that round of tests would do better.
Other criticism of that group of tests included:

• The tests were only done with level 100 characters which doesn't reflect practical squad composition for normal players
• Very few enemies in Kenshi actually use heavy armor, let alone masterwork armor and it would make more sense to do weapon tests against more representative armor sets
• White Plate and Assassin's rags weren't considered and believed to outperform heavy armor
• The Shek were deemed the most effective race, but it wasn't clear if this was due to a bug in Forgotten Construction Construction set
• Sabres weren't considered at all, in particular for indoor combat
• Robotic limbs were not tested when determining the recommended equipment loadout or how that would affect how a character should be armored

These points were explored in additional testing. Also considered was how squads that were partially composed of crossbows and melee troops performed against pure melee squads.
Materials and Methods
The Forgotten Construction Set (FCS) is the defacto modding tool for Kenshi. Two squads were created and made to compete against each other many times to see if they differed in any significant way. Squads competed until all the members of one squad were knocked out, at which point the winner and loser were recorded. Fischer's Exact Test was then used to see if the results were significant.
Squads
Squads were composed entirely of Greenlander humans (except when explicitly testing other races). The rational for this was Greenlanders have no combat buffs or debuffs and that this would avoid potentially problematic discrepancies in stats that could be attributed to either a defect in FCS or stats so high that they would be utterly impractical to attain.
The stats of each member of the squad were identical in all simulations, with tests being done on squads all at either level 100 or level 50 depending on the test.
When robotic limbs were being considered all members had masterwork KLR arms and legs.
One squad was created as a starter squad which placed all members directly under the players control. The other squad was created in a modded town on the unamed island named "Chi Town", which was composed of a single building. In each new game, the squad in Chi Town would spawn in its building and begin patrolling the area.
Chi Town was set as a hostile faction to the player controlled squad. On a new game the player controlled squad would spawn in Chi Town adjacent to the hostile squad. Despite having hostile faction relations, Chi Town never initiated combat against the player controlled squad, allowing the player squad to have its members positioned in a variety of ways to ensure an even match up. Combat was then initiated by the player after setup.
Squad Size
To avoid a known problem with the AI in which knocked out members would revive mid combat and begin patrolling the town rather than continue fighting, the squad size was limited to 5 on each side for melee tests.
A squad size of 10 was used for each size when crossbows were being tested.
Initiating Combat
Squads were either loaded by a new game or quick load. After this members of the player controlled squad were positioned in such a way that when combat was initiated all opposing squad members would participate in combat at about the same time.
During combat soldiers were knocked unconscious, but frequently regained consciousness mid combat and rejoined the fight. Combat continued until all members of one squad were knocked unconscious.
When testing indoor combat the members of the opposing squad were spawned in a stationhouse. The player controlled squad then entered the building and initiated combat. If at any time battle caused a member to navigate outside the building the test was discarded and a new iteration conducted.
When testing combined arms a purely melee group was compared against a squad with both crossbows and melee members. The purely melee squad was positioned at maximum distance before initiating attack. This enabled the opposing crossbows to fire off multiple volleys in an attempt to give them maximum utility.
Each squad had 10 members. In the case of the combined arms group 5 had melee weapons and 5 had crossbows.
The crossbows used in the experiments were the Eagle's Cross and Junkbow. The rational for this is that the Eagle's Cross has a very high Damage Per Second when used by a level 100 user. However the humble Junkbow was also considered as some assert that it is superior, despite it's comparably weak damage.
When a player is hit by a crossbow bolt they stagger regardless of the amount of damage. Some postulate that the faster rate of fire with the Junkbow causes opponents to stagger enough that a comparatively smaller group of melee fighters can land more attacks. In other words the expectation is that the weak Junkbow would cause victory by stun-locking opponents.
Regular Soldier Testing
When testing combatants at level 50 mid level quality was used for weapons and armor (Catun No. 3). Additionally the armor set used was the standard kit used by Holy Nation Paladins.
It was speculated that more common, representative armor like this might yield different results for weapon testing. In particular, the abysmal performance of the falling sun in previous testing was attributed to it being used against very heavy armor which would prevent it from severing limbs.
Given that Kenshi's combat mechanics focus more on disabling an opponent, the ability to cause amputation may be more important than being able to do more damage. The Holy Nation kit was arbitrarily selected among the 3 major factions, but deemed suitable because the coverage of the Holy Chest plate is low enough to allow for testing amputation while still being high enough to represent what a player would likely encounter during a base raid.
Fischer's Exact Test
Chi-Squared analysis was done using an online calculator located here using a simple 2x2 contingency table. For all tests the default parameters of a two sided tail, 1:1 odds and a 95% confidence interval were used.
Version
Tests were performed on Kenshi 1.0.68

Animal Care Compliance

No bonedogs were harmed over the course of this research.

Data

Elite Soldier Tests
The following equipment was used in each test unless explicitly stated otherwise:

Factor Type	Factor Used
Helmet	Crab Helmet
Pants	Samurai Legplates
Shirt	Dark Leather Shirt
Footwear	Wooden Sandals
Robotic Limbs	Masterwork KLR arms & legs
Weapon	Polearm
Level	100
Race	Greenlander

Test	Group 1 Loadout	Group 2 Loadout	Group 1 Win:Loss Ratio
Crab Armor - Dark Leather shirt vs Chainmail	Dark Leather Shirt	Blackened Chainmail	24:6
Crab Armor vs Samurai Plate w/ Polearms	Crab	Samurai	9:21
Crab Armor vs Samurai Plate w/ Nodachi	Crab + Nodachi	Samurai + Nodachi	3:13
Crab vs White Plate Jacket	Crab	White Plate Jacket	0:30
Crab vs White Plate w/ Nodachi	Crab + Nodachi	White Plate + Nodachi	9:21
Crab vs Assassin's rags	Crab + Blackened Chainmail	Assassin's Rags + Dark Leather Shirt	3:27
White Plate Jacket vs Assassin's rags	White Plate	Assassin's Rags	7:23
White Plate Jacket vs Samurai	White Plate	Samurai	27:3
White Plate Jacket shirtless vs shirt	White Plate [no shirt]	White Plate [Dark Leather Shirt]	14:16
White Plate Armor, Skeleton vs Human	White Plate Skeleton	White Plate Human	25:5

Combined Arms Tests
The following equipment was used in each test unless explicitly stated otherwise:

Factor Type	Factor Used
Helmet	Crab Helmet
Pants	Samurai Legplates
Armor	Assassin's Rags
Shirt	Dark Leather Shirt
Footwear	Wooden Sandals
Robotic Limbs	Masterwork KLR arms & legs
Weapon	Polearm
Level	100
Race	Greenlander

Crossbows used a longsword as a sidearm in all cases.

Test	Group 1 Loadout	Group 2 Loadout	Group 1 Win:Loss Ratio
Polearms vs Polearms + Eagle's Cross	Polearms	Polearm + Eagle's Cross	17:3
Polearms vs Polearms + Junkbow	Polearms	Polearm + Junkbow	20:0

Regular Soldier (L50) Tests
The following equipment was used in each test unless explicitly stated otherwise:

Factor Type	Factor Used
Helmet	Bucket Zukin
Pants	Stout Hessian Uniform
Armor	Holy Chest Plate
Shirt	Cloth Shirt
Footwear	Plated Longboots
Robotic Limbs	None
Weapon	Polearm
Level	50
Race	Greenlander

Test	Group 1 Loadout	Group 2 Loadout	Group 1 Win:Loss Ratio
Polearm vs Falling Sun	Polearms	Falling Sun	26:4
Indoors 5v5- Polearm vs Desert Sabers	Polearms	Desert Sabers	13:17
Indoors 1v1- Polearm vs Desert Sabers	Polearm	Desert Saber	10:20

Results

All heavy armor tested lost substantially to both White Plate & Assassin's Rags. The polearm continued to outperform the falling sun. Desert Sabres either matched the Polearm in performance or outperformed it when micromanaging.
Additionally, the dark leather shirt outperformed blackened chainmail. This bolsters claims that when robotic limbs are used that limb coverage is less important than total damage reduced to the torso and stomach.
The Assassin's Rags were undefeated in any category. It seems that the stat malus of heavy armor is indeed quite significant and likely responsible for consistent losses. But even when put against medium White Plate armor which has very little stat malus the Assassin's Rags continue to dominate; this is likely due to the bonuses to dexterity, combat speed and melee attack that they provide.
When pitted against identically sized squads, combined arm crossbows squads were utterly defeated by monolithic squads armed with Polearms.
Level 100 Tests

Test	P-Value	Statistically Significant?	Better Equipment
Crab Armor - Dark Leather shirt vs Chainmail	0.0000114	Yes	Dark Leather Shirt

Level 50 Tests

Test	P-Value	Statistically Significant?	Better Equipment
Polearm vs Falling Sun	< 0.0001	Yes	Polearm
Indoors- 5v5 Polearm vs Desert Sabres	0.4389	No	Neither
Indoors- 1v1 Polearm vs Desert Sabres	0.0194	Yes	Desert Sabre

Combined Arms Tests

Test	P-Value	Statistically Significant?	Better Equipment
Polearms vs Polearms + Eagle's Cross	< 0.0001	Yes	Pure Polearm Squad
Polearms vs Polearms + Junkbow	N/A	Yes	Pure Polearm Squad

Discussion

Kenshi has a wide variety of equipment and a great deal of complex calculations behind it. Despite that, there exist god-tier equipment that appears to provide little choice or strategy for a player looking to outfit a squad to be competitive.
Using robotic limbs changed the ideal composition for armor. Previous testing with crab armor indicated that Blackened Chain Mail had an edge over the Leather Turtleneck. This was attributed to crab armor only providing 90% coverage which meant that stronger protection for the arms could change the tide of lengthy battles; A disabled arm was an extreme liability.
However the massive HP boost provided by KLR arms seems to be significant enough that additional coverage at the cost of dexterity penalties is a bigger hindrance than help. After HP becomes substantially greater than the heath of the stomach or torso it makes more sense to forgo that protection if it means you can hit faster.
Players are unlikely in the early game to outfit their squad with masterwork KLR arms. During this phase one could speculate over whether to use chainmail or a leather turtleneck over the dark leather shirt. Previous testing indicated that chainmail was better for crab armor users fighting other crab armor users with leather turtlenecks, but that experimentation never considered light or medium armor which was shown here to be more effective regardless.
This challenges the wisdom of using chain armor at all. The use of a shirt can be forgone entirely if the player chooses to use White Plate Jackets. This armor provides 100% coverage for the torso, stomach and arms making a shirt redundant. Given White Plate Jackets outperformed Crab and Samurai armor and is more accessible and affordable it is difficult to justify the decision to use heavy armor at all, let alone chainmail in combination with it. This refutes the conclusion to use Crab armor in previous testing.
Given the outsized impact Assassin's Rags had (presumably due to the status boons) it is probably inadvisable to use chainmail and its debuffs alongside it. The Assassin's Rags provide relatively poor coverage, so a shirt of some kind is likely useful. What the ideal shirt for an Assassin's Rags user without KLR arms would be is unanswered in this study.
The Assassin's Rags provided adequate protection when dealing with ranged opponents. One plausible weakness would be the scant protection they provide against harpoons, which was not tested. Even if they are unparalleled in melee further research should be done to see if a single shot from a harpoon could kill a character using them. If that turns out to be the case then White Plate Jackets would apparently be preferable to any heavy armor.
White Plate Jackets outperformed both Crab and Samurai armor when using Nodachis which deal purely cut damage and have a penalty against armor. This is perplexing because heavy armor appears to have been intended to be the best choice for mitigating cut damage, but the stat malus associated with it causes light armor to be a better choice (at least against the weapons tested in this study).
The Falling Sun continued to yield mediocre results compared to the Polearm. Oddly, the Falling Sun was noticed to cause amputation semi-regularly in the tests against Polearms. Despite this knocking out the Polearm user, the remaining Polearms managed to win most fights anyway and bandage their crippled comrade post victory. While limb loss after battle is fairly devastating, this has limited utility from the players perspective; there isn't a strong need to amputate an enemies limbs because it doesn't matter how you disable your opponent as long as they are disabled. It probably makes more sense to just use the Polearm because it wins way more often.
The Polearm appears unbeatable with very few exceptions. Previous testing indicated the only weapon observed to outperform the Polearm was the Paladin's Cross and that was contingent on using it against skeletons. This research indicates that the Desert Sabre can be more effective than the Polearm indoors, but only if the Sabre user is not subject to the Polearms area of effect damage; i.e., the Sabre has to fight the Polearm one on one which requires micromanagement.
A particular surprise was how the Polearm performed by level 50 users indoors against Desert Sabre users in squads. Here Polearms have a very strong malus and the Sabers have a strong boon. Despite this there wasn't a statistically significant difference between them.
The Polearm did lose against Sabres frequently when forced to fight one on one indoors. From the players perspective this means that defending indoors with Sabres is a viable strategy early to mid game, although attacking grouped NPC Sabres indoors with Polearms is also surprisingly viable.
Enemies that use polearms are typically the most high level squads in the game (e.g., the skeletal legion and southern hive). But these late game squads almost exclusively use polearms themselves. This means a player's late game Polearm squad would not have any disadvantage indoors as both squads would have the same penalty. Furthermore, by the time a player is encountering late game squads like this they've likely leveled up enough to avoid the need to micromanage regardless.
Whether such a niche use case justifies sinking experience into building up the Sabre skill when they could be leveling up the Polearm is a matter for players to decide. It's difficult to pronounce Sabre's categorically superior, particularly when they appear to break even with Polearms when forced to fight in groups indoors.
Crossbows/Polearm hybrid squads turned out to be unviable against pure Polearm squads. Every crossbow simulation ended with unfavorable results when the competing squad invested in a Polearm instead. Crossbows probably would perform better during sieges where they had a benefit of a wall, but a turret would likely be a better option at that point. The Junkbows ability to stunlock evenly sized forces was insufficient. This strategy is probably only viable when many weak characters are fighting a single strong character, assuming it works at all.
The lack of some rock-paper-scissors mechanics in Kenshi limits how the player can think strategically about squad composition. Modding could plausibly create more interesting, balanced relationships between equipment. For example, increasing the damage of weapons like Katanas while simultaneously increasing the penalty against heavy armor could make them a viable alternative to Polearms in many common situations.
The interplay of armor penetration and raw damage could create a better defined role for light, medium and heavy builds. Additionally, crossbows might be enhanced to have a viable role in the field as they do not appear to excel there or behind allied walls where they could use a turret instead.
Overall if a players goal is to outfit a squad for the highest combat potential, the data indicates the choice is mostly linear- outfit the entire squad the same way, preferring Assassin's Rags or White Plate Jackets along with a Polearm or Paladin's Cross (both weapons can be available via a backpack).
As far as choice of character goes, Skeletons were shown to significantly outperform humans despite having no head protection. No comparison was done between the Shek and Skeletons as it currently unsettled whether a Shek can actually achieve a strength of 120 in vanilla Kenshi or if that is a bug in FCS. Regardless, in Vanilla Kenshi it is impractical to obtain very many skeletons at all without modding. The higher health pool of the Shek would likely make them the most accessible, competitive recruits when trying to build a strong military squad. If creating a squad of 30 soldiers it would be unsurprising if the majority of them needed to be Shek.

There’s no way this is even a .500 team next season. They need to get value for him while they can.
Additionally, whoever is performing out of: Pete, Manaea, Severino, Bader, Marte, McNeil, JDM, Garrett, Stewart, Lopez, and Diekman MUST be moved.
The only guys who I wouldn’t trade are Nimmo and Lindor (both are on untradable contracts) and Alvarez

We're looking for Full Time & Casual to join our team at South Melbourne. If you love coffee and people, talk to us!
People focused role and workplace culture Work with some of the worlds best coffee and equipment Potential for career development Padre Coffee is growing and we’re excited to be currently recruiting for our store in South Melbourne.
Who are we:
We’re specialty coffee roasters, wholesalers, and retailers.
Born in the dawning age of specialty coffee in Melbourne back in 2008, we’re both proud of our history and excited about the future. With bases in Melbourne, Noosa and Sydney, we’re firmly focused on ethical, sustainable growth and we’re always seeking to raise the bar with everything we do.
Of course, at the heart of our company are our people. We’re committed to building a workplace culture that supports personal development, collaboration, and teamwork. We believe in quality produce, sustainability, and in fostering long-term committed relationships throughout the supply chain.
Our community values, education, guidance, support and approachability, and this ensures the Padre bean lives up to its name, wherever you might find it. To work with Padre Coffee is to love what you do.
Who you are:
You love coffee. You have excellent communication skills and can build positive, lasting relationships with our retail customers.
You take pride in your work and enjoy working in a supportive and collaborative team environment. You enjoy variety in your daily tasks and perform well in a fast-paced environment.
You are personal, friendly, and professional.
Key accountabilities:
Maintaining high quality product standards through brewing and selling coffee Foster lasting customer relationships Brand ambassadorship Guide customers through our range of blends, single origins and extensive selection of coffee gear Work in a team to maintain a clean, approachable retail environment Actively engage in one’s own training and professional development Closely understand the network and responsibilities of our teams
Essential skills:
Excellent customer service experience Ability to work in a team Strong communication skills
Nice to have skills:
Management skills, experience In-depth technical understanding of specialty coffee
Why work here:
Industry leaders Supportive environment People focused workplace culture Career development opportunities Amazing coffee!
Remember, this is just a guide. If you see something on here that you can’t tick off – good, you can learn it here! In depth training is provided for all aspects of the role, all we ask is that you’re committed to your personal and professional growth.
We’d love to hear from you! Fill out the contact form on our website by hitting APPLY, and we’ll get back to you as soon as we can.
Apply here
Via needabarista.com.au

ive been playing on the better mc v26 modpack with friends on a server and things have been going smoothly until just today. a week or two ago i added a few mods, namely things like create, appleskin, botania, aquaculture, and ice and fire, and that all went smoothly as well for until just now. i logged on, fed my baby dragon and went out to get some more meat for dragon meal. after a few seconds of walking i got disconnected and any attempt to rejoin gets me kicked after a second or two of loading in. ive looked into it and hear a lot that its an issue of rubidium, but ive looked through the modlist and it is not there. i have xenon which i think is similar but updating xenon hasnt helped either. any help would be appreciated, please and thank you !!
[CRASH REPORT]

---- Minecraft Crash Report ---- // My bad. Time: 2024-05-18 16:57:26 Description: Encountered exception while building chunk meshes java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot invoke "net.minecraft.resources.ResourceLocation.m_135827_()" because "location" is null at org.embeddedt.modernfix.dynamicresources.DynamicBakedModelProvider.isVanillaTopLevelModel(DynamicBakedModelProvider.java:138) ~[modernfix-forge-5.13.0+mc1.20.1.jar%23619!/:5.13.0+mc1.20.1] {re:mixin,re:classloading} at org.embeddedt.modernfix.dynamicresources.DynamicBakedModelProvider.get(DynamicBakedModelProvider.java:160) ~[modernfix-forge-5.13.0+mc1.20.1.jar%23619!/:5.13.0+mc1.20.1] {re:mixin,re:classloading} at org.embeddedt.modernfix.dynamicresources.DynamicBakedModelProvider.get(DynamicBakedModelProvider.java:29) ~[modernfix-forge-5.13.0+mc1.20.1.jar%23619!/:5.13.0+mc1.20.1] {re:mixin,re:classloading} at java.util.Map.getOrDefault(Map.java:671) ~[?:?] {re:mixin} at net.minecraft.client.resources.model.ModelManager.getModel(ModelManager.java:62) ~[client-1.20.1-20230612.114412-srg.jar%23726!/:?] {re:mixin,pl:accesstransformer:B,pl:connector_pre_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A,re:classloading,pl:accesstransformer:B,pl:mixin:APP:modernfix-common.mixins.json:perf.dynamic_resources.ModelManagerMixin from mod modernfix,pl:mixin:APP:botania_xplat.mixins.json:client.ModelManagerAccessor from mod botania,pl:mixin:APP:fabric-model-loading-api-v1.mixins.json:BakedModelManagerMixin from mod fabric_model_loading_api_v1,pl:mixin:APP:puzzleslib.forge.mixins.json:client.ModelManagerForgeMixin from mod puzzleslib,pl:mixin:APP:bclib.mixins.client.json:ModelManagerMixin from mod bclib,pl:mixin:APP:fabric-resource-loader-v0.client.mixins.json:KeyedResourceReloadListenerClientMixin from mod fabric_resource_loader_v0,pl:mixin:APP:quark.mixins.json:client.accessor.AccessorModelManager from mod quark,pl:mixin:A,pl:connector_pre_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A} at net.mehvahdjukaar.moonlight.api.platform.forge.ClientHelperImpl.getModel(ClientHelperImpl.java:220) ~[moonlight-1.20-2.9.10-forge.jar%23621!/:?] {re:classloading} at net.mehvahdjukaar.moonlight.api.platform.ClientHelper.getModel(ClientHelper.java) ~[moonlight-1.20-2.9.10-forge.jar%23621!/:?] {re:classloading} at net.mehvahdjukaar.supplementaries.client.renderers.tiles.BookPileBlockTileRenderer.renderBook(BookPileBlockTileRenderer.java:133) ~[supplementaries-1.20-2.7.35.jar%23682!/:?] {re:classloading} at net.mehvahdjukaar.supplementaries.client.renderers.tiles.BookPileBlockTileRenderer.renderVertical(BookPileBlockTileRenderer.java:109) ~[supplementaries-1.20-2.7.35.jar%23682!/:?] {re:classloading} at net.mehvahdjukaar.supplementaries.client.renderers.tiles.BookPileBlockTileRenderer.renderBookPile(BookPileBlockTileRenderer.java:55) ~[supplementaries-1.20-2.7.35.jar%23682!/:?] {re:classloading} at net.mehvahdjukaar.supplementaries.client.block_models.BookPileModel.getBlockQuads(BookPileModel.java:43) ~[supplementaries-1.20-2.7.35.jar%23682!/:?] {re:classloading} at net.mehvahdjukaar.moonlight.api.client.model.CustomBakedModel.getQuads(CustomBakedModel.java:529) ~[moonlight-1.20-2.9.10-forge.jar%23621!/:?] {re:mixin,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:moonlight.mixins.json:SelfCustomBakedModel from mod moonlight,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.pipeline.BlockRenderer.getGeometry(BlockRenderer.java:167) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:mixin,re:computing_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:snowrealmagic.mixins.json:sodium.BlockRendererAccess from mod snowrealmagic,pl:mixin:APP:snowrealmagic.mixins.json:sodium.BlockRendererMixin from mod snowrealmagic,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.AccessBlockRenderer from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.pipeline.BlockRenderer.renderModel(BlockRenderer.java:156) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:mixin,re:computing_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:snowrealmagic.mixins.json:sodium.BlockRendererAccess from mod snowrealmagic,pl:mixin:APP:snowrealmagic.mixins.json:sodium.BlockRendererMixin from mod snowrealmagic,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.AccessBlockRenderer from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.redirect$fde000$lazurite$onRenderBlock(ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.java:2046) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:mixin,re:computing_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:block_id.MixinChunkRenderRebuildTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:shader_overrides.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.sodium.mixins.json:ChunkBuilderMeshingTaskMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.execute(ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.java:137) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:mixin,re:computing_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:block_id.MixinChunkRenderRebuildTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:shader_overrides.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.sodium.mixins.json:ChunkBuilderMeshingTaskMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.execute(ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.java:50) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:mixin,re:computing_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:block_id.MixinChunkRenderRebuildTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:shader_overrides.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.sodium.mixins.json:ChunkBuilderMeshingTaskMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.executor.ChunkJobTyped.execute(ChunkJobTyped.java:44) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:computing_frames,re:classloading} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.executor.ChunkBuilder$WorkerRunnable.run(ChunkBuilder.java:207) ~[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?] {re:classloading} at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?] {re:mixin} 

A detailed walkthrough of the error, its code path and all known details is as follows:
-- Head --
Thread: Render thread
Suspected Mods:

ModernFix (modernfix), Version: 5.13.0+mc1.20.1 Issue tracker URL: [https://github.com/embeddedt/ModernFix/issues](https://github.com/embeddedt/ModernFix/issues) at TRANSFORMEmodernfix@5.13.0+mc1.20.1/org.embeddedt.modernfix.dynamicresources.DynamicBakedModelProvider.isVanillaTopLevelModel(DynamicBakedModelProvider.java:138) Supplementaries (supplementaries), Version: 1.20-2.7.35 Issue tracker URL: [https://github.com/MehVahdJukaaSupplementaries/issues](https://github.com/MehVahdJukaaSupplementaries/issues) at TRANSFORMEsupplementaries@1.20-2.7.35/net.mehvahdjukaar.supplementaries.client.renderers.tiles.BookPileBlockTileRenderer.renderBook(BookPileBlockTileRenderer.java:133) Moonlight Library (moonlight), Version: 1.20-2.9.10 Issue tracker URL: [https://github.com/MehVahdJukaaMoonlight/issues](https://github.com/MehVahdJukaaMoonlight/issues) at TRANSFORMEmoonlight@1.20-2.9.10/net.mehvahdjukaar.moonlight.api.platform.forge.ClientHelperImpl.getModel(ClientHelperImpl.java:220) Lazurite (lazurite), Version: 1.0.2+mc1.20.1 Issue tracker URL: [https://github.com/Su5eD/Lazurite/issues](https://github.com/Su5eD/Lazurite/issues) Mixin class: link.infra.indium.mixin.sodium.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask Target: me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask at TRANSFORMExenon@0.3.11+mc1.20.1/me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.redirect$fde000$lazurite$onRenderBlock(ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.java:2046) Xenon (xenon), Version: 0.3.11+mc1.20.1 at TRANSFORMExenon@0.3.11+mc1.20.1/me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.pipeline.BlockRenderer.getGeometry(BlockRenderer.java:167) 

Stacktrace:

at org.embeddedt.modernfix.dynamicresources.DynamicBakedModelProvider.isVanillaTopLevelModel(DynamicBakedModelProvider.java:138) \~\[modernfix-forge-5.13.0+mc1.20.1.jar%23619!/:5.13.0+mc1.20.1\] {re:mixin,re:classloading} 

-- Block being rendered --
Details:

Block: Block{supplementaries:book\_pile}\[books=1,waterlogged=false\] Block location: World: (-1162,131,-955), Section: (at 6,3,5 in -73,8,-60; chunk contains blocks -1168,-64,-960 to -1153,319,-945), Region: (-3,-2; contains chunks -96,-64 to -65,-33, blocks -1536,-64,-1024 to -1025,319,-513) Chunk section: RenderSection at chunk (-73, 8, -60) from (-1168, 128, -960) to (-1153, 143, -945) Render context volume: BoundingBox{minX=-1170, minY=126, minZ=-962, maxX=-1151, maxY=145, maxZ=-943} 

Stacktrace:

at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.execute(ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.java:137) \~\[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?\] {re:mixin,re:computing\_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:block\_id.MixinChunkRenderRebuildTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:shader\_overrides.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.sodium.mixins.json:ChunkBuilderMeshingTaskMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.tasks.ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.execute(ChunkBuilderMeshingTask.java:50) \~\[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?\] {re:mixin,re:computing\_frames,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:block\_id.MixinChunkRenderRebuildTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.compat.sodium.json:shader\_overrides.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.sodium.mixins.json:ChunkBuilderMeshingTaskMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:APP:indium.mixins.json:sodium.MixinChunkBuilderMeshingTask from mod lazurite,pl:mixin:A} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.executor.ChunkJobTyped.execute(ChunkJobTyped.java:44) \~\[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?\] {re:computing\_frames,re:classloading} at me.jellysquid.mods.sodium.client.render.chunk.compile.executor.ChunkBuilder$WorkerRunnable.run(ChunkBuilder.java:207) \~\[xenon-0.3.11+mc1.20.1.jar%23710!/:?\] {re:classloading} at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) \~\[?:?\] {re:mixin} 

-- Affected level --
Details:

All players: 1 total; \[LocalPlayer\['LittleStinky04'/1128, l='ClientLevel', x=-1173.35, y=133.00, z=-946.85\]\] Chunk stats: 453, 453 Level dimension: minecraft:overworld Level spawn location: World: (-7,64,-1787), Section: (at 9,0,5 in -1,4,-112; chunk contains blocks -16,-64,-1792 to -1,319,-1777), Region: (-1,-4; contains chunks -32,-128 to -1,-97, blocks -512,-64,-2048 to -1,319,-1537) Level time: 38272887 game time, 366000 day time Server brand: forge Server type: Non-integrated multiplayer server 

Stacktrace:

at net.minecraft.client.multiplayer.ClientLevel.m\_6026\_(ClientLevel.java:455) \~\[client-1.20.1-20230612.114412-srg.jar%23726!/:?\] {re:mixin,pl:accesstransformer:B,xf:fml:xaerominimap:xaero\_clientworldclass,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_clientworldclass,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A,re:classloading,pl:accesstransformer:B,xf:fml:xaerominimap:xaero\_clientworldclass,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_clientworldclass,pl:mixin:APP:xenon.mixins.json:features.render.world.ClientLevelMixin from mod xenon,pl:mixin:APP:citadel.mixins.json:client.ClientLevelMixin from mod citadel,pl:mixin:APP:supplementaries-common.mixins.json:ClientLevelMixin from mod supplementaries,pl:mixin:APP:mixins.oculus.vertexformat.json:block\_rendering.MixinClientLevel from mod oculus,pl:mixin:APP:krypton.mixins.json:client.fastchunkentityaccess.ClientWorldMixin from mod krypton,pl:mixin:APP:lithium.mixins.json:chunk.entity\_class\_groups.ClientWorldMixin from mod radium,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.mixins.json:ClientLevelMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:APP:entityculling.mixins.json:ClientWorldMixin from mod entityculling,pl:mixin:APP:lambdynlights.mixins.json:ClientWorldMixin from mod ryoamiclights,pl:mixin:APP:blue\_skies.mixins.json:ClientLevelMixin from mod blue\_skies,pl:mixin:APP:bclib.mixins.client.json:ClientLevelMixin from mod bclib,pl:mixin:APP:architectury.mixins.json:MixinClientLevel from mod architectury,pl:mixin:APP:fabric-lifecycle-events-v1.client.mixins.json:ClientWorldMixin from mod fabric\_lifecycle\_events\_v1,pl:mixin:APP:farsight.mixins.json:ClientWorldMixin from mod farsight\_view,pl:mixin:APP:alexscaves.mixins.json:client.ClientLevelMixin from mod alexscaves,pl:mixin:APP:xenon.mixins.json:core.world.biome.ClientWorldMixin from mod xenon,pl:mixin:APP:xenon.mixins.json:core.world.map.ClientWorldMixin from mod xenon,pl:mixin:APP:forge-badoptimizations.mixins.json:tick.MixinClientWorldCloudColor from mod (unknown),pl:mixin:APP:forge-badoptimizations.mixins.json:tick.MixinClientWorldSkyColor from mod (unknown),pl:mixin:A,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A} at net.minecraft.client.Minecraft.m\_91354\_(Minecraft.java:2319) \~\[client-1.20.1-20230612.114412-srg.jar%23726!/:?\] {re:mixin,pl:accesstransformer:B,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick\_render\_call,xf:fml:xaerominimap:xaero\_minecraftclient,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraftclient,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A,re:classloading,pl:accesstransformer:B,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick\_render\_call,xf:fml:xaerominimap:xaero\_minecraftclient,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraftclient,pl:mixin:A,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A} at net.minecraft.client.Minecraft.m\_91374\_(Minecraft.java:735) \~\[client-1.20.1-20230612.114412-srg.jar%23726!/:?\] {re:mixin,pl:accesstransformer:B,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick\_render\_call,xf:fml:xaerominimap:xaero\_minecraftclient,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraftclient,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A,re:classloading,pl:accesstransformer:B,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraft\_runtick\_render\_call,xf:fml:xaerominimap:xaero\_minecraftclient,xf:fml:xaeroworldmap:xaero\_wm\_minecraftclient,pl:mixin:A,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A} at net.minecraft.client.main.Main.main(Main.java:218) \~\[forge-47.2.17.jar:?\] {re:mixin,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A,re:classloading,pl:mixin:APP:flywheel.mixins.json:ClientMainMixin from mod flywheel,pl:mixin:A,pl:connector\_pre\_launch:A,pl:runtimedistcleaner:A} at jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) \~\[?:?\] {} at jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:77) \~\[?:?\] {} at jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) \~\[?:?\] {} at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:568) \~\[?:?\] {re:mixin} at net.minecraftforge.fml.loading.targets.CommonLaunchHandler.runTarget(CommonLaunchHandler.java:111) \~\[fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar:?\] {} at net.minecraftforge.fml.loading.targets.CommonLaunchHandler.clientService(CommonLaunchHandler.java:99) \~\[fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar:?\] {} at net.minecraftforge.fml.loading.targets.CommonClientLaunchHandler.lambda$makeService$0(CommonClientLaunchHandler.java:25) \~\[fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.LaunchServiceHandlerDecorator.launch(LaunchServiceHandlerDecorator.java:30) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.LaunchServiceHandler.launch(LaunchServiceHandler.java:53) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.LaunchServiceHandler.launch(LaunchServiceHandler.java:71) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.Launcher.run(Launcher.java:108) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.Launcher.main(Launcher.java:78) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.BootstrapLaunchConsumer.accept(BootstrapLaunchConsumer.java:26) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.modlauncher.BootstrapLaunchConsumer.accept(BootstrapLaunchConsumer.java:23) \~\[modlauncher-10.0.9.jar:?\] {} at cpw.mods.bootstraplauncher.BootstrapLauncher.main(BootstrapLauncher.java:141) \~\[bootstraplauncher-1.1.2.jar:?\] {} 

-- Last reload --
Details:

Reload number: 1 Reload reason: initial Finished: Yes Packs: vanilla, mod\_resources, file/Stay\_True\_1.20.zip, file/MandalasGUI+Modded\_Dakmode\_v4.6.zip, file/Mandalas\_Legacy\_Gui\_Background.zip, overrides\_pack, file/Created Simple Storage 1.3.zip, file/Aether Regenerated v1.1.2.zip, file/waystones\_1.20.zip, file/Icon Xaero's 1.13.zip, file/Better\_Modded\_GUI.zip, file/NoBushyLeaves.zip, fabric, Moonlight Mods Dynamic Assets, builtin/DAGoldenSwetBallFixClient, diagonalblocks:default\_block\_models 

-- System Details --
Details:

Minecraft Version: 1.20.1 Minecraft Version ID: 1.20.1 Operating System: Windows 10 (amd64) version 10.0 Java Version: 17.0.8, Microsoft Java VM Version: OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (mixed mode), Microsoft Memory: 1171134000 bytes (1116 MiB) / 5049942016 bytes (4816 MiB) up to 7046430720 bytes (6720 MiB) CPUs: 4 Processor Vendor: GenuineIntel Processor Name: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz Identifier: Intel64 Family 6 Model 60 Stepping 3 Microarchitecture: Haswell (Client) Frequency (GHz): 3.19 Number of physical packages: 1 Number of physical CPUs: 4 Number of logical CPUs: 4 Graphics card #0 name: Intel(R) HD Graphics 4600 Graphics card #0 vendor: Intel Corporation (0x8086) Graphics card #0 VRAM (MB): 1024.00 Graphics card #0 deviceId: 0x0412 Graphics card #0 versionInfo: DriverVersion=20.19.15.4531 Graphics card #1 name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Graphics card #1 vendor: NVIDIA (0x10de) Graphics card #1 VRAM (MB): 3072.00 Graphics card #1 deviceId: 0x1c02 Graphics card #1 versionInfo: DriverVersion=31.0.15.4665 Memory slot #0 capacity (MB): 8192.00 Memory slot #0 clockSpeed (GHz): 1.60 Memory slot #0 type: DDR3 Memory slot #1 capacity (MB): 8192.00 Memory slot #1 clockSpeed (GHz): 1.60 Memory slot #1 type: DDR3 Virtual memory max (MB): 27052.93 Virtual memory used (MB): 21447.64 Swap memory total (MB): 10752.00 Swap memory used (MB): 732.73 JVM Flags: 4 total; -XX:HeapDumpPath=MojangTricksIntelDriversForPerformance\_javaw.exe\_minecraft.exe.heapdump -Xss1M -Xmx6720m -Xms256m Loaded Shaderpack: (off) Launched Version: forge-47.2.17 Backend library: LWJGL version 3.3.1 build 7 Backend API: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB/PCIe/SSE2 GL version 4.6.0 NVIDIA 546.65, NVIDIA Corporation Window size: 1360x768 GL Caps: Using framebuffer using OpenGL 3.2 GL debug messages: Using VBOs: Yes Is Modded: Definitely; Client brand changed to 'forge' Type: Client (map\_client.txt) Graphics mode: fancy Resource Packs: vanilla, mod\_resources, file/Stay\_True\_1.20.zip, file/MandalasGUI+Modded\_Dakmode\_v4.6.zip, file/Mandalas\_Legacy\_Gui\_Background.zip, builtin/overrides\_pack, file/Created Simple Storage 1.3.zip, file/Aether Regenerated v1.1.2.zip, file/waystones\_1.20.zip, file/Icon Xaero's 1.13.zip, file/Better\_Modded\_GUI.zip, file/NoBushyLeaves.zip, fabric, Moonlight Mods Dynamic Assets, builtin/DAGoldenSwetBallFixClient (incompatible) Current Language: en\_us CPU: 4x Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz Sinytra Connector: 1.0.0-beta.36+1.20.1 SINYTRA CONNECTOR IS PRESENT! Please verify issues are not caused by Connector before reporting them to mod authors. If you're unsure, file a report on Connector's issue tracker. Connector's issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/Sinytra/Connectoissues. Installed Fabric mods: ================================================== ============================== ============================== ==================== Eldritch\_End-FORGE-MC1.20.1-0.2.31\_mapped\_srg\_1.20 Eldritch End eldritch\_end 0.2.31 better-end-4.0.11\_mapped\_srg\_1.20.1.jar Better End betterend 4.0.11 bclib-3.0.14$wunderlib-1.1.5\_mapped\_srg\_1.20.1.jar WunderLib wunderlib 1.1.5 bclib-3.0.14\_mapped\_srg\_1.20.1.jar BCLib bclib 3.0.14 inventorymanagement-1.3.1+1.20\_mapped\_srg\_1.20.1.j Inventory Management inventorymanagement 1.3.1 spawnersplus-2.0.1-1.20.1\_mapped\_srg\_1.20.1.jar Spawners+ spawners\_plus 2.0.1-1.20.1 ModLauncher: 10.0.9+10.0.9+main.dcd20f30 ModLauncher launch target: forgeclient ModLauncher naming: srg ModLauncher services: mixin-0.8.5.jar mixin PLUGINSERVICE eventbus-6.0.5.jar eventbus PLUGINSERVICE fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar slf4jfixer PLUGINSERVICE fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar object\_holder\_definalize PLUGINSERVICE fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar runtime\_enum\_extender PLUGINSERVICE fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar capability\_token\_subclass PLUGINSERVICE accesstransformers-8.0.4.jar accesstransformer PLUGINSERVICE fmlloader-1.20.1-47.2.17.jar runtimedistcleaner PLUGINSERVICE modlauncher-10.0.9.jar mixin TRANSFORMATIONSERVICE modlauncher-10.0.9.jar redirector TRANSFORMATIONSERVICE modlauncher-10.0.9.jar fml TRANSFORMATIONSERVICE modlauncher-10.0.9.jar mixin-transmogrifier TRANSFORMATIONSERVICE modlauncher-10.0.9.jar connector\_loader TRANSFORMATIONSERVICE FML Language Providers: minecraft@1.0 Configured Defaults@8.0.1 javafml@null kotlinforforge@4.10.0 lowcodefml@null 

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been the standard measure of economic growth since World War II. It is widely believed that accelerating economic growth as measured by the GDP will translate into improved living standards. However, this view is being challenged with the argument that it is better to focus on measures of wellbeing than GDP because, despite robust economic growth over the past several decades, there are still millions of citizens living in poverty.Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been the standard measure of economic growth since World War II. It is widely believed that accelerating economic growth as measured by the GDP will translate into improved living standards. However, this view is being challenged with the argument that it is better to focus on measures of wellbeing than GDP because, despite robust economic growth over the past several decades, there are still millions of citizens living in poverty.

Besides, GDP measures perpetual growth, which is unattainable. Because GDP is an outdated proxy measure of economic growth, wellbeing, which is a multidimensional approach of measuring the most important aspects of people’s life, is gaining popularity.

Perpetual Growth

Stagflation is simultaneous economic stagnation combined with high inflation. In the long run, economic growth is dependent on two drivers; productivity and labor (Dolar). Productivity is affected by multiple factors. Improvements in many facets of productivity growth have decreased or reversed since the global financial crisis. The foremost factor is the demographic crisis of western countries that threatens the growth of GDP. Developed countries have experienced deceleration of working-age population, stabilization of educational attainment, and expansion into various forms of production. Furthermore, labor reallocation from less productive to more productive sectors has decelerated since the global financial crisis. Besides, radical disruptions to education and income losses are likely to affect human capital negatively. The waning demographics of western countries imply that acceleration of productivity growth is needed. The McKinsey Global Institute projected that 80% productivity growth is required to mitigate the effects of changing demographics (49). This projection is unlikely to be achieved given the dwindling working-age population in western countries. On the contrary, productivity growth is likely to continue decreasing because of the significant changes in the demographics unless the working-age population begins to grow again.

Perpetual Growth

GDP as a measurement is very outdated because it does not measure wellbeing. It is a statistical tool used to measure how well the economy is performing. However, it neglects important factors that determine the wellbeing, such as inequality and environmental services (Gallup). GDP as a proxy measure of economic growth ignores certain aspects that do not involve monetary transactions, does not assess changes in human capital, does not discriminate activities that enhance welfare from activities that reduce welfare, does not account for cultural difference, and omits the environmental costs and rates of depletion of resources (Giannetti et al. 14). The Measure of Economic Welfare is one of the alternatives for a gross domestic product as it measures consumption in the economy as a proxy for economic welfare. It adds up the benefits of goods and services consumption and subtracts the costs associated with the consumption, such as environmental pollution, providing a picture of economic welfare. Other economic welfare measures were developed after the Measure of Economic Welfare, such as the Index of the Economic Aspects of Welfare which incorporates environmental costs in estimating economic welfare (Giannetti et al. 15). Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare is an index developed to account for the current environmental issues while addressing the long-term ecosystem and natural resource sustainable use. More indices were developed with recent ones such as the State of Global Well-Being, the Better Life Index, and the Global Well-Being Index measuring a myriad of aspects of wellbeing. The Gallup Global Well-Being measures the behavioral economics of gross domestic product growth. It estimates the percentage “thriving,” “struggling,” and “suffering” of individuals in different countries and regions (Gallup). The indexes focus on the percent thriving in at least elements of wellbeing such as purpose (liking what they do), social (supportive relationships), physical (good health), community (liking the surrounding community), and financial (managing economic life well) aspects.
One in six adults worldwide are considered thriving – or strong and consistent — in at least three of the five elements of well-being, as measured by the Gallup-Healthways Global Well-Being Index. For example residents of the Singapore score quite low at the 19%, while New Zealand leads in Asia – Pacific with 67%.
The Gallup Global Well-Being measures have opened up new opportunities to study issues that affect people in different communities around the world in ways that GDP would not. For example, life satisfaction aspects of the Gallup World Poll data have been exploited to measure inequality in the distribution of subjective wellbeing (Gluzmann & Gasparini 2). Measuring inequality in subjective wellbeing might be complementary to the various approaches aimed at computing unfairness in a society because it may in some way have benefits over the usual income inequality measurements. Some perceived income inequalities may arise due to personal choices if all constraints are observed thus cannot be considered unfair. A case in point is when two individuals facing similar opportunities make different choices. One choice might lead to a better, healthier lifestyle while the other subjects the individual to poverty. Free choices resulting in socially acceptable income inequality should not be regarded as unfair. The assessment of subjective wellbeing is less likely to be susceptible to such differences. Under evaluation of subjective wellbeing, differences in perceived happiness may better estimate social unfairness rather than income unfairness (Gluzmann & Gasparini 4). Gallup World Poll provides data that can be used to compare wellbeing in different countries. It cures one of the most significant problems associated with compering inequality across countries and regions, namely, the generation of homogenous information. The poll poses the same question across all countries in all areas, which significantly reduces spurious differences in estimating comparisons. This reduces sources of measurement error significantly. It is noteworthy that people may not interpret and answer the standardized questions the same in different countries, leading to additional errors. However, the advantages of estimating subjective wellbeing and its rising popularity imply that improvements in the measurements will yield better results.

Technological Revolution

Usually, information and communication technologies are considered a key driver of economic growth and productivity. Different reviews indicate that technological effects tend to be positive at the organizational level (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD 34]). However, it has been reported that productivity tends to drop as economies entrench technologies in every sector. In other words, the rapid digitization of economies has not translated into strong productivity. On the contrary, productivity growth appears to have stunted over the past few decades, with the slowdown more pronounced in developed countries and also in developing countries (UNCTAD 34). This is a productivity paradox because as technological advancement and use have increased, productivity growth has decreased, which is contrary to popular expectations (Remes et al.). The digitization of economies into digital economies has thus far not translated into increased productivity. The paradox in the digital economy is attributed to different reasons. A more pessimistic perspective considers the technological effects on productivity as having fewer impacts on productivity growth than the revolutionary technological advances of the past (UNCTAD 34). A more optimistic view links the slow growth of productivity to the time lags between the time the technologies are introduced and the time actual effects are felt (European CEO). As a result, more visible impacts on productivity will occur when technologies are adopted widely within the economy. An additional contributing factor to the productivity paradox is the difficulties associated with measuring the digital economy. The slow growth in productivity might be explained by the lack of proper recording of technological activities in that in overall GDP estimation. Consequently, the proper measurement would be reflected in increased productivity. In developed countries, demographic factors associated with the aging population are also linked to the slow growth in productivity (UNCTAD 34). Therefore, the productivity paradox related to the technological revolution arises from multiple factors.

Quality of the GDP

Measuring economic growth in purely quantitative categories diminishes the significance of “high-quality growth.” High-quality growth encompasses increased technological self-reliance, significant production and welfare transformation, the establishment of a comprehensive safety net for the citizens, enhancement of quality healthcare, education, and employment, and reduction of inequality across regions and various demographic characteristics (Wärtsilä). It reflects a policy change that focuses on investment areas that guarantee increased productivity, such as production, consumption, healthcare, and education (Pfeffer). The concept of high-quality growth is being advanced by China to reorganize the economy in a way that focus on increased domestic consumption and investing in productive sectors to drive the overall economic growth. For example, after decades of heavy investments in infrastructural projects and the manufacturing sector, the country realizes that roads and bridges are not productive but rather facilitates productivity. Policy change to shift investment into more productive sectors of the economy might bring sustainable economic growth and wellbeing. At the sectorial level, administrative job control is one of the main factors impacting the health of the employees (Pfeffer). The return of line of sight to the work, workplace flexibility, autonomous fusion teams, fluidity in work practices, and organizational health can elevate the personal wellbeing of the employees. The functional organization provides an environment with less stress caused by micromanagement demands from the employees. Therefore, wellbeing is a product of economic policy at the national level and the contribution of the private sector in nurturing the wellbeing of employees.

Conclusion

The failure of GDP as a measurement proxy of economic growth is less effective in contemporary society. It assumes that an economy will experience perpetual growth, which is a difficult achievement. Even where economies have experienced phenomenal growth over the years, the economic expansion failed to transform the lives of millions of citizens. The technological revolution also has been unable to expand the GDP as it was initially believed despite the fact that the significant impacts technology has had on society. It led to the conclusion that GDP has limitations as a measure of economic growth because it does not account for the non-monetary aspects that matter to people. As a result, new indexes such as the Gallup Global Wellbeing have been developed and are experiencing rising popularity due to their ability to compute wellbeing. In particular, the estimation of subjective wellbeing creates opportunities for improved measurement of social inequality. Furthermore, the realization that wellbeing is important to citizens is supporting new ideas of measuring national economic growth. China’s shift to the assessment of the quality of economic growth indicates a paradigm shift where countries focus on national statistics that reflect their economic realities.

References

Dolar, Veronika. “Why stagflation is an economic nightmare – and could become a real headache for Biden and the Fed if it emerges in the US.” The Conversation (2022). https://theconversation.com/why-stagflation-is-an-economic-nightmare-and-could-become-a-real-headache-for-biden-and-the-fed-if-it-emerges-in-the-us-179036. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
European CEO. “Giving a voice to the digital revolution’s silent majority.” (2019). https://www.europeanceo.com/industry-outlook/giving-a-voice-to-the-digital-revolutions-silent-majority/. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Gallup. “2014 Country Well-Being Rankings.”
Giannetti, Biagio F., et al. “A review of limitations of GDP and alternative indices to monitor human wellbeing and to manage ecosystem functionality.” Journal of cleaner production 87 (2015): 11-25.
Gluzmann, Pablo, and Leonardo Gasparini. “International inequality in subjective well‐being: An exploration with the Gallup World Poll.” Review of Development Economics 22.2 (2018): 610-631.
McKinsey Global Institute – “Global growth: Can productivity save the day in an aging world?” page 49
Pfeffer, Jeffrey. “The overlooked essentials of employee wellbeing.” McKinsey Global Institute (2018). https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-overlooked-essentials-of-employee-well-being. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Remes, Jaana et al. “Solving the productivity puzzle.” McKinsey Global Institute (2018). https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/regions-in-focus/solving-the-productivity-puzzle. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Wärtsilä. “Going beyond GDP: China targets a new path to growth.” (2021). https://www.wartsila.com/insights/article/going-beyond-gdp-china-targets-a-new-path-to-growth. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Authors

Paul Lalovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice

Tesha Teshanovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice

In most cases when sales of a product have plateaued, market saturation is often used. That suggests there is more supply than demand for a given product. Western marketplaces are bursting with work options and ways to make money. Today’s young people must act smart and move quick to locate new employment opportunities.In most cases when sales of a product have plateaued, market saturation is often used. That suggests there is more supply than demand for a given product. Western marketplaces are bursting with work options and ways to make money. Today’s young people must act smart and move quick to locate new employment opportunities.

Suppose one wants to be successful in this field, they should focus on expanding markets, developing innovative technology, and uncovering undiscovered company prospects in highly profitable niche industries, among other things (Agarwal et al, 6). Businesses in crowded markets may cut the price of their products to gain a larger market share. As a result, businesses are always undercutting each other to attract new customers. Cost-cutting is a common strategy for firms when profits are stagnant (Simonazzi et al., 17). Unnecessary or avoidable cost savings are welcome, but they don’t address the underlying issue.

Where do I pay my taxes if I am a digital nomad?

According to the recent reports, westerners already pay too many taxes in a number of business entities. Due to the high cost of living in their new home nation, one out of every five American ex-pats is contemplating renunciation of their citizenship. Senators are concerned about how to pay for the deficit, and Senate rules prohibit raising long-term deficits through reconciliation bills. Consequently, more money will be available to Congress if the budget reconciliation plan generates more revenue. The United States will not make significant investments unless Congress makes significant adjustments to the tax structure (Michel et al., 89). Increased budget deficits could slow the long-term growth of the economy. In addition private investment or borrowing from other countries is used to pay for government borrowing when the economy is close to capacity (Chen et al.440). When a person is experiencing difficulties, it might harm their future well-being. To put it another way, the long-term impacts of tax policy are influenced by its incentives and its budgetary implications.
Digital nomads have historically been seen as a threat in some places, but several countries around the world are now actively seeking to attract this growing digital population through new remote work visas.
All this converges into a superstorm, and more and more people will opt for digital nomad opportunities. While tax regulations can vary significantly depending on where you are in the world, general guidelines may be helpful to for those seeking information on paying taxes as a digital nomad. Naturally, tax filing is done with the country of tax residence as determined by the place of a principal residence. Digital nomads, however, may encounter a variety of additional layers of tax residence due to their physical presence in other countries during a tax year. In addition, state/province/territory and local taxes may also apply.

Cancel culture and family safety issues

The cancellation culture has a lot to do with social media and if it hadn’t been for social media, pop culture would not have gotten the attention it has in the previous decade. In most case the cultures are frequently canceled by unfollowing, blocking, and publicly criticizing an organization or individual on social media. Due to their large social media followings, celebrity cancellations often garner much media attention. As a result of using social media to communicate with celebrities, many teenagers desire to emulate their peers. Most adolescent cancel culture is carried out online, primarily via comments and unfollows (Yar et al., 80). This can happen in the real world, such as at school or in extracurricular activities. They are often rejected, mocked, and disregarded by their peers, who have had their activities canceled. Most Western workers are experiencing job instability due to the growth of a “cancel culture” in the workplace (Dąbrowska-Kłosińska, 30). This can be a terrific method for teenagers to learn and grow, as their peers may call them out for using insulting words or acting inappropriately.

Investment analysis and forecasting as part of the individual development strategy

To produce an accurate financial projection, one must consider both general macroeconomic trends and your organization’s specific circumstances. Predicting how much money a company will generate and spend in the future is known as financial forecasting. A full estimate contains both short-term and long-term revenue estimates and costs that aren’t anticipated at the time of the estimate (Poorter et al.120). People who know how to create models are critical to financial forecasting firms that do a good job. Some people have extensive knowledge of the organization, its sectors, and the communities it serves to support them along the way. Similarly, data collection and analysis are critical to the financial forecasting process and the use of the software.

Scenario planning and personal life choices

Global events like COVID 19, inflation, or food crisis can impact our life choices a lot. To avoid reacting to events, we need to think about what might happen in the future. Scenario planning helps us do this. Scenario planning allows business leaders to consider what might happen, reflect on past actions, and devise strategies for positive and poor outcomes. Scenario planning is more than just a means to think about the future when it comes to financial planning. It can assist one in determining how much money you’ll make, how much money you’ll have, and how to manage hazards. Early warning indications of difficulties can be spotted by leaders who make their organizations aware of potential issues (MacKenzie et al.900). One can use scenario planning papers to quickly run through numerous scenarios and figure out the best course of action in the event of a crisis. Making a strategy in the event of an emergency is essential. Having a strategy in place is critical in the event of a product going viral and seeing a threefold increase in demand in a single day.

Building the right skills for the jobs of the future

To be eligible for future employment, one must possess the abilities that will be most in demand. Coding has taken off swiftly as one of the most sought-after skills. Almost any industry can benefit from the versatility and scalability of computer languages. People believe that coding is so prevalent in the workplace that it will soon become an essential skill for everyone. Learning to code is a difficult task. Learning how to code and the language you choose impacts how long it takes to do so (Moldoveanu et al.40). Before you begin learning how to code, look at several computer languages and determine which ones are relevant to your industry. Many people begin by studying HTML or JavaScript when learning a new language. After you’ve mastered the fundamentals, you can move to more popular and widely used languages like Python. It is possible to store and manage corporate data in the cloud while allowing employees to work from home.

Riding on global trends of tomorrow

By adopting an agile culture, knowing how to cope with ambiguity, pushing outside our comfort zones, and quickly adjusting to new trends, among other things, we achieve success. We all agree that the weather has gotten more erratic in the last few decades. Crop failure, sea-level rise, and water scarcity are exacerbated by global warming. Malaria and dengue fever epidemics are also on the rise due to the influx of people from developing countries. According to the Kyoto Protocol, 175 countries have agreed to begin the long process of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by signing it (Penalva et al., 340). According to business leaders worldwide, firms have a larger role in society and should do more than merely follow the law to reduce pollution. According to a McKinsey survey, this is the case. The “triple bottom line” refers to a company’s efforts to benefit its shareholders and its workers and the environment. Increasing numbers of businesses are waking up to the need to lower their carbon footprints, produce ecologically friendly products, and operate their operations for more than just quarterly profits.

References

Agarwal, Khushboo, and Veeraruna Kavitha. “Saturated total-population dependent branching process and viral markets.” arXiv preprint arXiv: 2203.16239 (2022).
Chen, Novia X., and Terry Shevlin. ““US worldwide taxation and domestic mergers and acquisitions” a discussion✰.” Journal of Accounting and Economics 66.2-3 (2018): 439-447.
Dąbrowska-Kłosińska, Patrycja. “The Protection of Human Rights in Pandemics—Reflections on the Past, Present, and Future.” German Law Journal 22.6 (2021): 28-38.
MacKenzie, Meredith A., et al. “Respecting choices and related models of advance care planning: a systematic review of published evidence.” American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® 35.6 (2018): 897-907.
Michel, Adam N. “When It Comes to Taxation, Borders Matter—Europe and the US Should Act Accordingly.” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief 4855 (2018).
Moldoveanu, Mihnea, and Das Narayandas. “The future of leadership development.” Harvard business review 97.2 (2019): 40-48.
Penalva, Jose. “Innovation, personalised education and Little Red Riding Hood.” International Journal of Lifelong Education 39.4 (2020): 339-355.
Poorter, Lourens, et al. “Can traits predict individual growth performance? A test in a hyperdiverse tropical forest.” New Phytologist 219.1 (2018): 109-121.
Simonazzi, Annamaria, Jorge Carreto Sanginés, and Margherita Russo. “The Future of the Automotive Industry: Dangerous Challenges or New Life for a Saturated Market?” Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper Series 141 (2020).
Yar, Sanam, and Jonah Engel Bromwich. “Tales From the teenage cancel culture.” The New York Times (2019).
Authors

Paul Lalovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice

Tesha Teshanovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice

I know this question has been asked before, but I was wondering if the introduction of Harmony MC makes any difference. Does anyone know how Indelible Promise S5 performs compared to On the Fall of an Aeon S5, assuming it allows you to use an atk% rope and build more crit dmg (while still comfortably reaching 240% break effect with Ruan Mei and HMC)? Or does Aeon provide too many valuable stats? Is the overall difference so minimal that it's not really worth leveling another LC?

Here ye hear ye fellow jerkers, and shitposters alike. I propose we pool all of our funds to make the richest NHL team ever, and we perform the biggest fucking troll in NHL history.
1rd. Since we are an Expansion team, we are going to get some VERY good draft picks. I propose we trade this first overall pick for a franchise player like Patrick Kane.
2th. We then use our expansion draft picks and our entry draft picks for the next 150 years to get all the stars. McDavo, Crosby, Ovechkin, all of them
3st. To avoid cap issues, and to keep signing superstars over the next few years (when their contracts expire with their current teams), we put all our players on LTIR, and send them down to the AHL, and ECHL. Instead of playing any actual games, we just forfeit every time
4st. By using the magical money we have all pooled, we can use the LTIR for all of our high value players, while keeping the rest in the AHL and NHL.
5rd. We use some funds to create another bout of super COVID, in order to make the league wide playoffs happen again.
6st. Because Salary Cap doesn’t apply during the playoffs, we can then troll everyone and win the Stanley Cup with our fucking super team, and then go back into our LTIR hidy hole of not doing jack shit
7rd. Sign everyone to 12 year super deals at the end of the season, and then fold our NHL, AHL, and ECHL teams and not sell the playing rights of any of our players, this way, these players will never be able to play again

In this second part of my "series", I am taking a look at the potential trades for the Blazers. If you'd like to read the first part on Toumani Camara, the link is here: Offseason Review: Toumani Camara : ripcity (reddit.com)
Without a clear consensus on draft prospects where 8-10 guys are all within the same tier, this draft cycle will see a lot of teams looking to move around and potentially trade down. The Blazers are in a unique position with 4 picks in the top-40, a few veteran players which will interest teams, and an all-star caliber player they might be looking to trade away. Now that the order is settled, I want to look at the Blazers assets, objectives, and 5 teams who are likely trade partners.
Primary Trade Assets:

• #7, #14, #34, #40 - The Blazers are in a good position to add talent in this year's draft and have a lot of flexibility to move around. At 7, they'll be able to draft one of those top tier players. At 14, there will be a at least one or two swings (Saluan, Missi, Williams, Dadiet, etc.) as well as really solid players (Carter, McCain, Da Silva, Knecht) available depending on who falls vs. rises. The two second round picks give us the opportunity to move up into the late first or might be valuable enough to move up a couple slots from #7 or #14.
• Malcom Brogdon – Brogdon is in his final year for $22M. He is a 6MOTY caliber player which every single playoff team could use on their roster. So much so that, of all the teams remaining, he would play big minutes for all of them except Boston. He also has value to teams like Detroit who could use a veteran presence. His expiring deal gives the team flexibility to another team's reduce cap long term, trade at the deadline in a larger package, or look to extend on a more team friendly deal with bird rights. The general consensus is he is worth a mid to late first round pick, such as a lottery protected first round pick from a contender.
• Anfernee Simons – Simons has two years left of an AAV of $26M. Some fans think Simons is not worth much. I would disagree. Simons is one of a handful of players who generates elite on and off ball gravity in the NBA. Any team he goes to, he would transform their offensive spacing. We’ll talk about fits in a bit, but I would look for a Dejounte Murray like package; a high-end prospect and 2 good draft picks.
• Jerami Grant – Grant is owed 4 years with an AAV of $32M. NBA media types like to call that out as an overpay, but Grant’s salary as a percentage of cap will decrease through the length of the contract as the cap rises. Grant is another player who instantly improves a contender as a third option. I would aim for at least one good first round pick, a decent prospect, and potentially a pick swap.
• Robert Williams III – Timelord is on a great contract – 2 years with an AAV of $12M. With his injury history, his value is hard to determine, but his contract makes it an easy trade piece. Steven Adams got 3 second round picks, so I think that is his floor. He is likely worth more to the Blazers than other teams at this juncture.
• Matisse Thybulle – Thybulle is another tradeable contract – 2 years with an AAV of $11M. The second year is a player option. I do not see him having negative value on that deal, but we are looking at 1-2 second round picks + a flier prospect.
• Jabari Walker – I like Jabari, but in the context of our rebuild, he is the odd man out. I think he might have some value in the league for a real future second.
• Dalano Banton – Similar to Jabari, he was a great find this year. With his performance, could be a good sweetener in a trade or be able to trade for a real future second round pick.

Offseason Objectives
Not only are assets important, but the overall objectives of the offseason. The way I see it, here are the Blazers objectives:

• Get more high-end talent, trading up may help guarantee us getting the best players we can. We should also aim to get a high caliber player who has already shown flashes in the NBA on a rookie scale deal.
• Get more shooting, we should definitely keep at least one of Brogdon, Grant, or Simons. I am in favor of trading Simons as he has the most value, and Grant / Brogdon are essential to giving our young guys enough spacing to develop. I also highly value shooting in this draft for that reason. The more spacing we have; the more likely Scoot and Sharpe develop into dudes.
• Get under the luxury tax. There is a lot of consternation and clickbait discussion the salary situation. It is massively overblown – the bigger priority is to simply consolidate the roster down to 14 active players. If we kept our two current first round picks, and cut Jabari and Banton, our salary would be: $172.6M. The Luxury tax threshold is 171.3M, a difference of just $1.3M.
• Consolidate roster / draft picks. We have 14 players on the roster with 4 draft picks. We should aim to consolidate around more high-end talent.
• Get more picks in 2025 / 2026. These are great drafts, and we'll have a better idea of our needs next year.
• (Nice to have) Get the future first unlocked from the Bulls. There is no urgency on the Blazers part to part with the pick. There is a chance it never conveys into a first (silver lining of us being terrible!). If it does, it is outside the lottery, and we are a good team. That said, if there is an opportunity for us to trade a second round pick this year to get control of that pick back, it is not a bad move.

With that in mind, let’s talk about 5 trade partners who I think we will be having constant conversations with: Philadelphia, Detroit, Orlando, Detroit, Chicago, and Memphis. Please note all these trades are frameworks, the point is really to think about the primary value each team is getting back, along with the matching salary. The exact number of picks, the type of picks, the filler contracts, and the sweeteners are really guess-work. I wouldn't read too much into it.
Philadelphia:

• Cap Space: Up to $65M.
• Draft Assets: #16, #41
  • The 76ers can trade their 2024 first-round pick (16) starting the night of the draft. They also have the least favorable 2026 first from Oklahoma City, Houston (if 5-30) and the Clippers. They are owed an unprotected first from the Clippers in 2028 and have the right to swap firsts with LA in 2029 (if 4-30). In total, Philadelphia can trade up to five firsts starting in late June.
• Targets: Brogdon, Grant, RWIII
  • Explainer: Philadelphia has a ton of cap space. They will likely make a run at George, LeBron, maybe Derozan, but if they strike out, they will want to look at the trade market. Grant feels like an ideal fit to pair with Maxey and Embiid. Brogdon is another option for them. This might be a good trade destination for Jabari and / or Banton, who can provide them with good depth to rebuild their roster on very team friendly contracts as sweeteners.
• Trades:
  • Jerami Grant, Jabari Walker, Dalano Banton for #16, Least Favorable 2026 FRP, lottery protected 2030 FRP
    • The Blazers get a pick this year, a pick next year, and a highly valuable first-round swap. To be honest, I have no idea the particulars here, but the point being is Grant for draft capital
  • Malcom Brogdon for #16, 2027 second round from MIL, 2030 SRP from PHI.
    • I could see us going for that least favorable 2026 FRP as well by including one or both our seconds.

Detroit:

• Cap Space: Up to $66M.
• Draft Assets: #5, #53
  • Detroit owes a first-round pick to New York that is top-12 protected in 2025, top-10 protected in 2026 and top-nine protected in 2027. The next available first-round pick the Pistons can trade is in 2029. They have no incoming first-round picks via trade. They have nine second-round picks available.
• Targets: Anfernee Simons, Malcom Brogdon
  • Explainer: Detroit also has a ton of cap space, a lack of shooting, and a lack of veteran leadership. They could really use either Anfernee Simons or Malcom Brogdon. Simons is an ideal fit next to Cade to unlock the spacing Cade desperately needs. Detroit is also overhauling their front office, so who knows which players they value vs which they do not.
• Proposed Trades:
  • Anfernee Simons & #14 for #5 and Ausar Thompson
    • If the Pistons insist on keeping Ausar, Ivey is the player I would want. I would not include #14 in that scenario. Again, who knows how the new FO thinks about Ausar / Ivey.
  • Malcom Brogdon & #7 for #5 and 2-3 SRP
    • This trade assumes the Blazers have a target in mind at #5 they really want who might not make it to 7. Beyond that, the major benefit is giving the team substantially more cap and roster flexibility. It is possible we could include some real sweeteners, like Kris Murray, to move up from #14 to #5. We could also look to include #16 assuming we get it from PHI in a Grant trade. In that scenario, we would have to get one shooter like Risacher, Sheppard, or Knecht for one of those top 2 picks.

Orlando

• Cap Space: Up to $35 million
• Draft Assets: #18, #47
  • The Magic are one of seven teams that control their own first-round pick over the next seven years. They can also trade swap rights each year. The Nuggets owe the Magic a first-round pick. It is top-5 protected in 2025, 2026 and 2027. Orlando has the right to swap its 2026 first for the less favorable of Phoenix and Washington. Orlando has 12 second-round picks available.
• Targets: Anfernee Simons, Malcom Brogdon
  • Explainer: Much has been made of Anfernee Simons to the Magic, and for good reason. Aside from him being from Orlando, much like with Cade, Simons would unlock Paolo and Franz in a real way. For the Blazers, the Magic’s major draft assets and young talent of Anthony Black and Jett Howard are enticing. Brogdon is another option here if the Magic are looking for a one-year player to give them veteran leadership and spacing with more long-term flexibility.
• Proposed Trades:
  • Anfernee Simons, #40 for Anthony Black, #18, 2025 unprotected FRP, 2030 pick swap.
    • Blazers get exactly what they are looking for, a major trade up in 2024, a high value prospect, a 2025 first, and a pick swap far into the future. Some do not think Black will fit with the Blazers, but that is a problem down the road. Let us see how he plays with our other core. Given how well Banton played, Black could be a much better version of him. Banton may also be a sweetener in the deal. Blazers could look to take on Cole Anthony’s contract as well to give the magic more cap flexibility. Another permutation could see RWII be swapped for WCJ or Thybulle.
  • Malcom Brogdon, RWIII for a 2025 lottery protected FRP, WCJ.
    • The Blazers accomplished two goals here. They get another FRP in 2025. While it may be lower in order, it is possible Orlando will take a small step back. Something in the late teens is very valuable in next year’s draft. We also gain cap flexibility, and swap RWIII for WCJ who have extremely similar contracts.

Chicago

• Cap Space: Likely none.
• Draft Assets: #11
  • The Bulls can trade their own 2024 first-round pick starting on the night of the draft. They owe a first-round pick to the Spurs that is top-10 protected in 2025 and top-8 protected in 2026 or 2027. They are owed a first-round pick from Portland that is top-14 protected over the next four years. If the first is not conveyed, the Trail Blazers will send a 2028 second. The Bulls have three second-round picks available.
• Targets: Jerami Grant, Malcom Brogdon, Matisse Thybulle, Deandre Ayton
  • Explainer: The Bulls are looking to still be competitive enough to sell seats and be stuck in mediocrity. They are likely looking to build around Coby White. The Blazers have plenty of high-level role players which could be interesting. For the Blazers, they could target trading up from 14 to 11, targeting Pat Williams in a S&T, and getting that flexibility back as a Sweetener.
• Proposed Trades:
  • #34, 2028 SRP for the rights for the Blazers pick back
    • The Bulls might really like someone at 34 and value it as a first-round pick value. If that is the case, and the Blazers are not as enamored with someone in that range, it is advantageous for both sides to resolve the pick now.
  • Malcom Brogdon, #14 for Lonzo Ball, #11, rights to the Blazers pick back.
    • Like the above trade, the Bulls might value bringing in Brogdon to improve their roster. All it costs them is dumping Lonzo’s contract, moving 3 spots back in the draft, and the Blazers pick back. Blazers could put in #40 as a sweetener.
  • Patrick Williams S&T (5 years - ~$125M), Jevon Carter, Dalen Terry, for Jerami Grant
    • This trade is a bit more complicated, but the framework is Patrick Williams for Jerami Grant. If the Blazers are high on Williams and the Bulls might not want to commit to him, the Bulls get an immediate upgrade to “win now.” The additional salary could come from a few different angles, but I would like to also like to get Dalen Terry or Julian Phillips as a sweetener. If Williams gets a bit more salary, then less salary filler is necessary. High risk, High reward for Blazers.

Memphis

• Cap Space: Likely None
• Trade Exception: The Grizzlies have a $12.6 million dollar trade exception from the Steven Adams, which RWIII and Thybulle can fit into.
• Draft Assets: #9, #39, #57
  • The Grizzlies control their own first-round picks over the next seven years. They also have the right to swap their own 2026 first for the less favorable of Phoenix, Orlando, and Washington. The Grizzlies also have the right to swap their own 2030 first for the less favorable of the Suns and Wizards. Memphis has six second-round picks available.
• Targets: #7, RWIII, Matisse Thybulle
  • Explainer: Memphis may be incentivized to trade-up a couple slots if they are enamored with Donovon Clingan (or another prospect) and he is there at #7. They also might be interested in trading back to #14 if they are more interested in a center available in that range, such as Missi, Edey, Ware, etc. I have a feeling this is a team that will target Edey given their history of valuing analytics and not caring as much about physical attributes.
• Proposed Trades:
  • #7 for #9 and Vince Williams Jr
    • Sam Vecenie proposed this trade. The Blazers move back two slots and get a good young wing.
• #14 and RWIII OR Matisse Thybulle for #9
  • The Grizzles got another win-now player for moving back 5 spots and utilizing their trade exception.

I think my next post will be my NBA draft big board. Please share your thoughts below, and if you are curious about any other potential trade partners, happy to think about them more!

Article: https://www.useyourbrainforex.com/post/silver-skyrockets-to-11-year-high
Big news in the world of precious metals! This past Friday, silver hit an 11-year high, gaining over 10% in just a week, marking its best performance since early April. This surge occurred after silver broke out of a consolidation phase that lasted for the past three and a half years. 📊
Here’s a quick rundown of what’s happening:

• Silver Surge: Silver prices rose above $31 per ounce, reaching their highest level since February 2013. This significant price increase has pulled the entire precious metals sector up, especially as silver lagged behind gold's rise in the first quarter.
• Market Optimism: Analysts are highlighting that silver is now catching up to gold, which also continues to rise. Gold ended the week at $2414.60 per ounce, up 1.34% on Friday and over 2% for the week. The increase in all four precious metals and a notable decrease in the gold-silver ratio indicate strong market optimism.
• Potential Rally: This could be just the beginning of a new rally for silver. The breakout from consolidation might be sustained, following a pattern similar to copper’s previous market performance.
• Factors Driving Growth: Gold could soon return to record levels, driven by geopolitical uncertainties, central bank demand, and strong retail demand in Asia. The entire precious metals market is experiencing significant growth, with investor confidence and market fundamentals aligning to support higher valuations.
• Caution Ahead: Mike McGlone from Bloomberg Intelligence remains optimistic about gold as a safe haven but warns that silver might be vulnerable if copper prices drop, affecting silver's industrial applications.
• Looking Forward: Next week, the market will closely watch speeches from six U.S. central bankers and the minutes from the Federal Reserve's monetary policy meeting. Additionally, key economic data such as home sales, manufacturing and services sector sentiment, and durable goods orders for May will be closely monitored.

This is an exciting time for precious metals investors. What are your thoughts? Do you think this rally will continue? Are you planning to invest in silver or gold? Let’s discuss! 💬

The Guess Who - Running Back Thru Canada Live in Winnipeg June 30, 2000 Canwest Global Park Winnipeg MB CA *** Enjoy the full concert FREE @ https://bit.ly/guesswhorunningbackthrucanada *** A Hometown Throwdown Live in the Heart of the Nation by R. Dale Roth 2024-05-18
At the end of June in the summer of 2000, Canadian rock royalty, The Guess Who, stopped Running Back Thru Canada smack dab in the middle of the nation, just long enough to unleash a massive sonic super storm on the band's hometown of Winnipeg.
Under a prairie sky ablaze with the setting sun, Winnipeg's favorite sons, The Guess Who, returned to the heart of their homeland for a concert that resonated with the pride and passion of a nation. Canwest Global Park, a baseball diamond transformed into a rock 'n' roll cathedral, became the epicenter of a musical pilgrimage for fans who had followed the band's journey from local heroes to international icons.
The air crackled with anticipation as the stadium lights illuminated the stage, revealing a backdrop steeped in history: vintage amps that had witnessed countless jam sessions, a drum kit weathered by years on the road, and an unmistakable sense of homecoming. The crowd, a sea of red and white, erupted in a chorus of cheers as the band emerged, their faces beaming with the joy of playing for their hometown faithful.
From the opening chords, it was clear that this was no ordinary concert. It was a communion between a band and its people, a celebration of shared memories and a testament to the enduring power of music to connect and inspire. Burton Cummings, his voice as strong and soulful as ever, poured his heart into every lyric, his every gesture a tribute to the city that had nurtured his talent.
Original guitarist Randy Bachman, a hometown hero in his own right, unleashed a torrent of electrifying riffs, his fingers dancing across the fretboard with the ease and confidence of a seasoned veteran. The rhythm section, a well-oiled machine, provided the driving beat that propelled the music forward, while the keyboards added a touch of psychedelic magic.
As the night unfolded, The Guess Who revisited their greatest hits, each song a cherished memory brought to life. The crowd sang along with every word, their voices blending in a harmonious chorus that echoed throughout the stadium. Cummings, visibly moved by the outpouring of affection, shared anecdotes and reflections on his lifelong love affair with Winnipeg, his words resonating with the deep sense of belonging that permeated the atmosphere.
The stage setup, while simple, was imbued with a sense of history and authenticity. The lighting, a kaleidoscope of colors and patterns, transformed the stage into a living canvas, enhancing the emotional impact of each song. The sound, crisp and powerful, ensured that every note reached every corner of the stadium, creating an immersive experience that transcended the physical space.
As the concert reached its crescendo, The Guess Who unleashed a barrage of their most beloved anthems, the crowd responding with an outpouring of unbridled enthusiasm. The final encore, a heartfelt rendition of a song that has become synonymous with Canadian identity, brought tears to many eyes, a testament to the power of music to evoke deep emotions and forge lasting bonds.
The Guess Who's homecoming concert was more than just a performance; it was a celebration of the unbreakable ties that bind a band to its roots, a reminder that home is where the heart is, and that the music born from that connection has the power to transcend time and touch the souls of generations to come.
Song by song:
1. "Runnin' Back To Saskatoon": The opening chords of this prairie anthem resonated with the crowd, setting the tone for a night of hometown pride and musical nostalgia. Cummings' vocals, infused with a sense of longing and belonging, captured the essence of the Canadian experience.
2. "Rain Dance": The band's signature blend of rock and psychedelia was on full display in this swirling, hypnotic number. Bachman's guitar work, a blend of bluesy riffs and soaring solos, transported the audience to another dimension.
3. "Glamour Boy": This hard-rocking track showcased the band's raw energy and rebellious spirit. Cummings' snarling vocals and Bachman's blistering guitar solos ignited the crowd, sparking a wave of headbanging and fist-pumping.
4. "These Eyes": One of the band's most beloved ballads, this song evoked a bittersweet sense of longing and regret. Cummings' emotive vocals, accompanied by a delicate piano melody, touched the hearts of everyone in the stadium.
5. "Lookin' Out for #1": This self-affirming anthem, with its driving rhythm and catchy chorus, had the crowd singing along at the top of their lungs. The song's message of self-reliance and determination resonated with the independent spirit of the Canadian people.
6. "No Sugar Tonight/New Mother Nature": This medley of two classic hits showcased the band's versatility, seamlessly blending hard rock with acoustic folk. Cummings' dynamic vocals and Bachman's intricate guitar work kept the audience on the edge of their seats.
7. "Let It Ride": This bluesy rocker, with its swaggering groove and suggestive lyrics, injected a dose of raw sensuality into the set. Cummings' playful vocals and Bachman's searing guitar solos fueled the crowd's passion.
8. "Undun": This haunting ballad, with its melancholic melody and poetic lyrics, showcased the band's introspective side. Cummings' plaintive vocals, backed by a sparse arrangement, created a moment of quiet reflection.
9. "American Woman": The band's most iconic anthem, this song exploded with an energy that shook the stadium to its foundations. Cummings' defiant vocals and Bachman's iconic riff ignited a frenzy of national pride.
10. "Albert Flasher": This quirky, tongue-in-cheek number, with its playful lyrics and infectious rhythm, brought a smile to everyone's face. Cummings' mischievous vocals and the band's lighthearted performance created a moment of pure fun.
11. "Takin' Care of Business": This high-octane rocker, with its driving beat and motivational lyrics, had the crowd on their feet and singing along. The song's message of hard work and perseverance resonated with the Canadian work ethic.
12. "Laughing": This introspective ballad, with its melancholic melody and poignant lyrics, explored the darker side of human emotions. Cummings' vulnerable vocals and the band's understated performance created a moment of shared empathy.
13. "Bus Rider": This funky, groove-laden track, with its catchy chorus and danceable rhythm, injected a dose of soulful energy into the set. Cummings' playful vocals and the band's tight interplay had the crowd moving to the beat.
14. "No Time": This hard-rocking anthem, with its driving rhythm and rebellious lyrics, unleashed a wave of raw energy. Cummings' powerful vocals and Bachman's blistering guitar solos ignited the crowd's passion.
15. "Share The Land": The concert culminated with this iconic anthem, a rallying cry for unity and compassion. Cummings' heartfelt vocals and the band's soaring performance brought the crowd together in a shared moment of national pride.
Featuring: The Guess Who
Burton Cummings - lead vocals, piano, harmonica, flute, guitar
Randy Bachman - vocals, guitar
Don McDougall - vocals, guitar
Bill Wallace - bass, vocals
Garry Peterson - drums, percussion, vocals
Please Comment, Like, Share & Follow.
Enjoy this, & more complete concerts FREE @ StaticContentCreations.com
Thanks for watching. D♠️R
https://reddit.com/link/1cv34ye/video/irqspvxb481d1/player

Hello, everyone!
I’m fascinated by K-pop music videos and albums that feature crime, gritty, violent and rebellious themes, but these are very rare among girl groups. One example that comes to mind is aespa's Winter in her 'Drama' trailer. I loved the edgy and intense vibe. I think Ryujin's solo, Run Away, would fit into the concept, even if it's not explicitly about crime, but the urban and grunge vibes make up for it. A song that wouldn't fit, even if it shows a lot of violence and crimen in its mv, is Top or Cliff by Kim Sejong. I'm looking for something more urban, less high society.
This type of concept is "common" for boy groups, you can easily find it in songs by groups like ATEEZ (Bouncy or Guerrilla come to mind), Stray Kids, NCT 127 and even TXT, with Good Boy Gone Bad. But I want to see similar concepts in girl groups.
Can you suggest any K-pop girl groups or albums that have similar concepts? Specific music videos, performances, or even individual tracks are welcome too!
Thanks in advance for your suggestions!

So, I'm seeing some mixed reactions to the last season, and honestly I'm feeling them myself as well, so I decided to sit down and sort of breakdown and analyse some of what happened over the course of Oxventure, what seemed to go well and what didn't, and maybe try to get into some litcrit of the whole thing.
Warning: I'm not always nice in this write up, though I have done my best to be fair and honest throughout in what I think the potential pitfalls were and how I hope they might be better addressed in future campaigns.
I've played D&D myself for a few years, listened to other Actual Play series (notably NADDPOD and some D20 at one end of the competency-of-players scale, and Dragon Friends and Dungeons and Drongos at the other), and write... a lot. Including over 250k of fanfic specifically for Oxventure, which started off as an excuse for smut but ended up being a lot of worldbuilding.

System & Setting

Johnny has made no secret that they're not a huge fan of D&D, indicating that they feel it overshadows other systems, and given that the Spicy Rat Caper was meant to be a one-off but fans loved it perhaps they felt a little trapped in the system. This did lead to some funny moments (Faire Trial and Max commenting that they sometimes felt "like a big dice rolling around a tray" sticks with me) but sometimes felt a bit mean-spirited ("Crawl Me Maybe" and the heavy 'lol dungeon crawling is so ridiculous' comes to mind).
It was also clear that at times, none of the group seemed to know the game and the rules super well. From Mike not knowing his movement speed ("30 what? Miles an hour?") to Merilwen not using her animal forms or changing out her spells until level 8, to the underpowering of most of the classes, it became more of an issue as time when on in some ways.
It's easy enough to understand why, live on stage and starry-eyed at Harry McEntire as Aubrey, Johnny missed that in the combat Aubrey cast two levelled spells in the same round (against the rules) as well as using two sorcery spell modifiers in the same round (also against the rules, and they mentioned this on the podcast). Sorcerer was also a new class to everyone, and dealing with a new class is always going to be difficult, especially dropping them in at a higher level rather than starting from level 1 and building up.
However, bluntly, most of the guild weren't using their class/subclass abilities to the fullest. Rules lawyer Andy did the best, so he gets a pass here, and Ellen got sharper with Merilwen over time to stuff like knowing her spell components, tracking her spell slots, and preparing her spells. However, the concept of Egbert as "a paladin who doesn't do paladin things" (quote from the post-Deadlands discussion) was ultimately really limiting not just for Egbert (Mike commented in one podcast episode that he felt he'd trapped himself in only using Egbert's abilities in ways that were funny) but for the entire concept of paladins - Max might as well have been a fighter in the fight in Gnome Alone that they took part in, and we never saw Shattershield fight at all. There were references to combat offscreen in Out of Order, but... that was it. (Additionally, while paladins can be poisoned, as poison and disease are different in 5e rules, paladins can pump out a LOT of healing, and a citadel full of them should have a lot of magical reserves to draw on as a result.)
And Egbert isn't the only one who was limited. One of the biggest features of Great Old One warlocks (which Prudence is, with Cthulhu), is that from level one they have telepathy within 30ft ("Awakened Mind"). Prudence went the entire campaign without using this. Although Johnny allowed the Message cantrip to be treated like this, allowing people to reply to it when RAW it is one-way only, this meant that Dob also essentially gained Prudence's power because he also had Message. Merilwen was limited in her animal forms and the spells that she knew up until level 8, and it was noticeable how everyone was shocked at her power once she had full RAW druid range. Corazón, on the other hand, not only had Andy keeping on top of all of his class and subclass features, but got two subclasses, leaving him about on par or slightly overpowered for the level he should have been looking overpowered because the others didn't use their abilities so well. Meanwhile, Dob was given access to full bardic abilities, but only used bardic inspiration in some of their level 1 adventures and then not much again until the final season.
The counterpart to this under-utilisation of class potential was the amount of 'rule of cool' or 'rule of funny' which sometimes worked well (Merilwen befriending the owlbear in Quiet Riot, or the reflavouring of Thunder Wave to do lightning damage instead based on their initial misunderstanding) and sometimes ended up breaking the game (the "everyone can cast Moonbeam" joke that escalated to the scrolls of Moonbeam that made the finale kind of laughable). Sometimes this seemed to be the time and audience pressure of live shows (allowing Prudence to use the hammer to wheel her way through the skeletons in Stop Hammer Time), but other times it was just letting them do things that went outside the rules (Egbert body-slamming six(?) Otherberts at once in Bad Altitude, or Dob casting all his spells at once in Corpse and Robbers) seemingly preferring the immediate humour or "yes and" over the potential internal logic or end implications.
The contrast between this permissiveness, sometimes to the point of breaking logical immersion, honestly seemed sharper to me when it was laid against Andy's GMing in Deadlands. Whether it was reminding people that there were snipers on the rooftops in Dead Man's Worth or refusing to yes-and a chandelier in More Wonders Than, he made it more difficult for the players and in doing so made them work harder within their skillsets and the setting, making the victories feel harder-won as a result. I'm aware that some people didn't like Andy's GMing specifically because he was less permissive, but I believe that his intention - and the outcome - was a stronger narrative that made the characters feel active and not just lucky. (Liliana lampshaded this in Frenemy at the Gates when she asked whether things often just fell into their laps, like with knowing Binbag, and it almost felt like a spiteful comment so it surprised me to hear it from Johnny.)
What I hope: It has been indicated that Johnny has created the new setting for the next game, so hopefully they have put things more to their liking at the beginning and will not end up seeming to dunk on the premise of their own series. I'm also hoping for everyone to either use more standardised rules, or at least establish in-game standards at the beginning so that all of the characters, and players, feel like they're on a level playing field from the off. Johnny seemed to much more enjoy the systems of Blades in the Dark and Deadlands (which were designed to be less superhero-level) and even the lower levels of Oxventure (especially Tier 1) where the characters were just people who were skilled but not particularly out of the range of normality; I'd be interested to see whether they lean more in that direction and keep the characters lower-powered as a result.

Characters & Character Arcs

Again, it's worth noting that the characters were initially conceived as being for a one-off game, so the initial concepts did not necessarily need planned arcs. However, the rockiness of some of the arcs overall may have contributed to issues with the series, especially as it stretched out over so many years. I'll go through the PCs alphabetically, then Liliana, then mention any other NPCs. There are two elements here - in-character goals, and character arc goals, which both play into things.
Corazón - in my opinion, Corazón had one of the stronger character arcs, which may reflect Andy's interest in writing (and now being published!), going from the coward pirate-wannabe who abandoned his crew to the curse, to the person who threw himself in front of a spell meant for Merilwen. This was highlighted in his reply to Them in Prism Break, even before the Power Word Kill spell. In fact, the Power Word Kill brought a level of pathos to the fact that he had told Them that he was not even done growing as a person. Andy commented on the podcast at some point that he had expected at the beginning to be one of the more morally shady characters (as a pirate), but found himself playing a line of being immoral regarding money but caring deeply about physical hurt or harm to people. Corazón also had two layers of in-character goals - to break the curse (limited) and to become a betterichereal pirate (more open-ended) and find his own identity which allowed him to carry character development over the years even when the curse was ignored for extended periods. Goals: clear and stepped, with the curse as a plot-hook; arc: good and perfectly timed for the finale.
What I hope for: More of the same, really.
Dob - Dob came in early with a clearly defined goal (to find his sister) - but this was done in Brawl of the Wild and Dob has been sort of... undefined ever since. It absolutely makes sense that he would have floundered for a while, but Dob has gone several years without settling on new goal, and Luke also didn't seem to settle on a character arc (the romance subplot in Orbpocalypse Saga through Bride or Die seemed to be almost a character arc, but never got full payoff?) which left Dob feeling... well, at times it almost seemed like Luke wanted to get rid of him to play someone else instead. This was unfortunately also highlighted in conversation with Them, as the response that Dob gave was about him being a "mote of chaos". I obviously couldn't speak for others, but I found this underwhelming and unconvincing as an answer, as it didn't give me any sense of why a powerful celestial being would consider this an argument - if Dob had developed the argument to be that chaos is generative and creative in a way that pure order cannot be, and/or that the free will and agency of sapience demand that they be allowed to act and to try even if they make mistakes or fail, I think there might have been something there, but he didn't really seem to. Goals: had one which formed a good plot-hook, then went without; arc: unclear.
What I hope for: Luke to determine more of a character arc, or series of shorter arcs, perhaps drawing from his Blades in the Dark DMing experience, and to either pick a more open-ended goal or to move along a series of goals over time.
Egbert - Egbert came in with the vaguer goal of "atonement", which gave him more wiggle room, but unfortunately didn't seem to actively pursue it a lot of the time. In Legacy of Dragons it was revealed that he was searching for atonement for the deaths of two Dragon D'Or members - but by this time, so many people around the Oxventurers had died, including innocent bystanders, that the deaths of two other paladins felt like nothing. (Mike commented, again on the podcast, that he agreed with the commenters at the time who agreed that they knew it was his backstory from the beginning because only two paladins had died. The two figure paled next to the collateral damage that the party later caused.) Mike also commented on the podcast that during lockdown, he had made a conscious change with Egbert in to try to avoid combat as much as possible, and to avoid fatal attacks if in combat, but it wasn't clear how long that lasted. It may have been trying to avoid being the annoying/preachy paladin that stopped him from trying to influence the rest of the party or to save lives around them, but unfortunately it meant that it was difficult to see a real sense of wanting to atone in Egbert's arc. Letting innocents die around him isn't exactly less culpable than killing them himself. (Notable incidents included Mule Be Sorry, Wrangle in the Tangle, Hag Reflex, and Squid Pro Quo.) In terms of character arcs, there was definitely an element of going from seeking approval from Dragon D'Or to seeking that of his friends, but that was just a switching of approval-seeking rather than a significant change. Goals: had one, but didn't seem to actively pursue it; arc: moved from pursuing the morals of Dragon D'Or to pursuing the morals of the Oxventurers.
What I hope for: Mike to come back with a character who seeks to pursue their own goals more directly (see Barnaby and Silas, who both felt much stronger in this sense).
Merilwen - Merilwen was supposed to be about balance and protecting nature, but didn't always heavily engage with this point of view, even when the actions of the other Oxventurers should have absolutely led to discussions or disagreements between them. Many people commented on Andy being dickish about shooting seabirds in Legacy of Dragons, but there are other incidents, including the Wrangle in the Tangle (again), Eldritch or Die Trying (where it would have been interesting to see Merilwen's preference for nature clash with the need for the crystal) and the Extinction season which seemed to veer between being set up to be about Merilwen, then swapping to Dob-centric, then cleaning up Corazon's curse. In terms of character arc, I think there might be an element that can be teased out about her not fitting in with elf society and fitting in better with the faster-paced, more chaotic world of shorter-lived peoples, but this feels like speculation on my part more than something intended. Naturally, a character of around 100 is not going to feel as suited to a coming-of-age story as younger ones, but characters of all ages should be able to have character arcs. (Even if they might be slower in longer-lived people like elves - an example I can go to here is Galadriel, from Tolkien, who in her youth was proud and refused a pardon that would have allowed her to return to Valinor, but at the end of LOTR is humble enough to accept and go there. It took millennia for her, but it was a character arc all the same!) In Merilwen's conversation with Them, her uncertainty seemed to talk to this - a lack of clarity about where her characterisation was supposed to have gone over the last few years. I think there was a real opportunity here to explore Merilwen's relationship with morality and the difference between neutrality and passiveness, which unfortunately was missed. Goals: was supposed to be about nature but didn't push for it; arc: [speculation] seeking a non-elven community that she matched better with.
What I hope for: Ellen to have a character with more defined goals or arc, or gaps still to be filled in, rather than a static momentary sketch of personality/character that doesn't feel designed to be changed over time. Again, Lilith with her secrets/looking into the paranormal, and Edie with her goal to help people in a world in which monsters aren't going away, felt stronger as characters with goals and arcs, and I'd be happy to see more of that.
Prudence - Ambitious from the off, Prudence never actually struggled for goals - power, knowledge, magic, influence. The open-endedness of these goals once again served Prudence pretty well for carrying her through individual adventures/games and over the course of the whole canon, even if she didn't come in with clearly-defined (plot hook) goals like Corazón's curse. For the first few years, it felt that her character arc wasn't hugely significant, although there was certainly an element of found family over selfishness that played into it, but Jane also discussed (again, in the podcast) how the werebear element was really quite exciting for her as it allowed her to begin to explore the clash between werebear Lawful Good status and Prudence's usual Chaotic Evil desires. Eldritch or Die Trying explored this in a somewhat exaggerated way, with Cthulhu offering power in exchange for the destruction of the others (I suspect in Prudence's question about specifying people, she was trying to figure out whether she could kill just Liliana) which was a somewhat blatant nod to the character arc but did underline it. (Unlike the others, this also established Prudence's character arc before Them.) Goals: open-ended in a way that leaves them technically incomplete even now but which were stably useful throughout canon; arc: de-isolation and alignment shifting (in a way that should have been ripe for playing off against Liliana's) which played out well.
What I hope for: A character with perhaps some more specific or plot-hook goals as well as broader life goals. Prudence's character arc played out more subtly than Corazón's and sometimes perhaps got lost behind the louder personalities of some of the others, but I do think was well done. A less obvious way to explore or demonstrate it would have been nice.
Liliana - So. Here we go. Liliana was essentially a DMPC for the last season, but was a recurring character before that, with a stated goal of subjecting part or all of G'eth and broader goals (indicated or stated in Prism Break and the finale season generally) of academic/scholarly improvement, arcane knowledge, and the notion of making people appreciate what they have by threatening to take it from them. As a villain, she was threatening, and the layering of goals once again worked here, even with the abrupt movement to 'save G'eth' in the last season because, well, you can't rule what no longer exists. However, I am honestly confused as to what her character arc was supposed to be - whether her stated change of heart in front of Them was real, or whether that was a lie that Them somehow did not call out or challenge. Considering in Frenemy at the Gates, Liliana says that Prudence is the most like her, there was a potential here to play against Prudence's character arc of coming to trust others, even appreciate others, and facing the consequences of suffering making her realise her own flawed logic. I really do not know whether her betrayal of the guild was planned from the beginning (in which case, her talking to Them feels like it was overplayed, and Them should have challenged her on it) or whether Johnny added it because the fight against the giant was over more quickly than anticipated (compare to Dine Hard where the chef was the one person they did not stat up because they didn't expect the guild to fight him). Goals: logical, stepped, and worked for a villain; arc: ????? was there an arc? Was it fake? Was it desperation? Why did she, on 1 hitpoint, try to Power Word Kill Prudence instead of Teleporting away?
What I hope for: I don't know, with this one, really. Liliana's weird arc feels more related to the odd pacing of the last season than an underlying characterisation issue, for me, so I think it's more related to pacing/wanting Oxventure campaign 1 to close out.

Player Etiquette

...okay, this one is going to be a little bit harsh, perhaps. But the main campaign, more than either Blades in the Dark or Deadlands, really suffered from certain players having a bout of Main Character Syndrome.
I say specifically players here, because it was entirely in-character for certain characters (largely Corazón) to think of themselves as the main character and behave as such. However, even if the characters think that, is generally considered good etiquette for the players to treat each other as equals, let each other take turns in the spotlight, and have their Moments.
Good examples would be the group letting Merilwen be the main character in Peak Performance, Prudence explore her sundered relationship with Cthulhu during the Orbpocalypse Saga, or Dob showing off his acting bard chops in Dine Harder.
However, at various times, various people have overstepped. Sometimes in live shows where the audience response and excitement probably played a role (Rolling in the Deep) it's more understandable, but it also happened elsewhere. Mike got some flack for picking up the eyepatch at the end of Cursed Case Scenario and 'ruining' Corazón's moment, but even Johnny called Andy out for muscling in on Dob's subplot in Court in the Act, and Life Finds a Dob was almost uncomfortable at times. There was also something of a trend of Dob deliberately acting against the party for unclear reasons (possibly meant to be humour?) - either running away from them in Life Finds a Dob, refusing to 'share' Corazon's body in Portal Combat, or his contrary behaviour in Hunter Pressure in not wanting to fight the hunters/murderers they were facing.
I'm not sure whether this trend of contrariness fed into the unclear character arc that I mentioned above, or the other way around, or whether the two just fed into each other.
The most extreme example of this was, undoubtedly, Dob jumping in on the shoot-off between Liliana and Prudence right at the end of Portal Combat. Liliana approached Prudence in Frenemy at the Gates because they were the most alike. Prudence was the one with the first kill of the whole campaign, using Eldritch Blast, against the party's wishes and Corazón's protests specifically - how appropriate would it have been for her to get the last kill of the campaign, with Eldritch Blast, in defense of herself and her party and as retribution for Corazón? But instead, Luke inserted Dob into the standoff and Johnny played into it, even to the absurd extent of letting the skeletons use Time Stop (a 9th Level spell) just to explain why Dob's whole conversation with them could take place faster than Prudence could fire off an eldritch blast. Corazón's self-sacrifice and Merilwen's reveal of her Reincarnation spell was therefore also partially overshadowed by Dob sacrificing his magic for one more hitpoint of damage on Liliana rather than letting Prudence have her moment.
What I hope for: some of the lessons learned from other campaigns to lead the players to be better at taking turns, both in terms of people not trying to be the Main Character at inappropriate moments, players stepping up and into the leading role when it is appropriate for them to do so, and Johnny more actively monitoring the balance between the players and shutting down some of the more egregious behaviour

Morality

This... isn't actually going to be complaining about characters behaving immorally or even being evil. Prudence is honestly a great example of how to play an evil character in a way that doesn't break a party, while Corazón works as being immoral about money but moral about hurting people (at least most of the time). I've also thoroughly enjoyed some other games in which the characters have been far from moral (NADDPOD's Trinyvale series is a good example of this - the characters are scam artists, grifters and egotists, and the DM commented that "character growth doesn't have to be positive!"; they complain the entire time while saving the world).
But it's consistency that is more of a sticking point, as well as the player treatment of the moral positions of the party. It's hard to know how to treat the morals of the party when they vary from letting a town burn for being slightly annoying (Mule Be Sorry) to most of the team being ready to forgive a hag who used to eat human(oid) children (Hag Reflex). This isn't just the players either - Stop Hammer Time used the murder of children as a joke, and marked a change in tone for the treatment of NPCs and civilians as not mattering compared to the preferences or comfort of the main characters. The skeletons killing the children wasn't even some sort of monkey's paw scenario about asking for there to be no more orphans in the town, either - it was just nasty shock value, in many ways. And playing this sort of thing for humour makes it quite hard to handle some of the rest of the series as a result.
There also felt like a dissonance, at times, between the objective morality of the characters and how the players seemed to want them to be treated. Prudence never claimed to be anything other than evil, from shooting someone with eldritch blast during the Spicy Rat Caper to enjoying Hammerdahl's necromancy in Extinction - Jane even indicated that she wanted to explore shifting Prudence's alignment post-Fast and the Furriest, which can be seen as Prudence is much less interested in random acts of destruction and seems quite happy to get her kicks scaring or torturing people (Silent Knight) or watching the gruesome spectacle at the end of Knight Shift. So Jane's plans matched Prudence's behaviour - a softening of her deliberately evil acts, but still happy to let others be evil.
For the others, though, it didn't always match. Merilwen's "True Neutral" label often felt more like passively letting her party members be evil, rather than actively seeking balance, Egbert was supposed to be on the search for atonement but regularly allowed or took part in atrocities, and Dob seemed more inclined to act on what the audience or Luke thought was funny (or even deliberately seeking to be contrary) rather than following a consistent attitude to morality. His vaguely annoyed "Skeletons!" and hands on hips in return to "It's orphans, boss" was clearly played for laughs, and in Mule Be Sorry he turns on the town easily, which then makes it feel strange when in Hag Reflex he objects to letting the hag live. Dob's infatuation with Liliana and Katie Pearlhead, both of whom have killed or caused the deaths of great numbers of people, also makes it harder to take his claims to morality at all seriously. The potential moral issues of Merilwen killing the Otherberts to prevent them from taking a message to Liliana (Bad Altitude) is turned into accusing her of "war crimes", but it is absurd in the face of how many other innocent bystanders the guild had killed or caused to die in other stories (from as early as Quiet Riot, in which the paladins were annoying but killing them was honestly overboard, to as late as Squid Pro Quo where Dob seemed to forget that five people had died and then brushed off the deaths).
NPCs also got hit by this at times, from the town mayor in Mule Be Sorry (again) who put his townsfolk on spike growth just to cross it, to the chef in Dine Harder who was abruptly made a cannibal to get a fight going, to the decay of morally Good characters like Captain Shattershield turning away from the Upside Down Mistmire when in his first appearance he had been willing to fight Death itself for being on Mistmire's grounds. It's hard to take seriously moral questions about keeping the Dragon Under Mistmire in its shelter, and the accidentally-caused deaths of two paladins, when the guild has been responsible for much worse.
What I hope for: an approach to morality that does not prioritise momentary humour over consistency; evil behaviour to be acknowledged as evil and owned rather than treated as protagonist-centric; a moral balance which makes it possible to really explore moral issues and concerns rather than extreme behaviour which then makes it impossible to treat conflict seriously. Legacy of Dragons, as a standalone arc seeking Egbert's redemption, exploring the protection vs freedom of the gold dragon, and considering how to improve vs break systems, had some really great potential - but because of extreme 'rule of funny' behaviour in the past, it was impossible to really feel that it had the moral gravitas and weight that it deserved. When the skeletons go from murdering a dozen innocent children (Stop Hammer Time) to giving Merilwen a bad haircut (Mean Gulls) and this is almost treated as somehow consistent in evilness, it makes it harder to respect the characters or the expectation of moral standards.
The Good: The humour, the quick-wittedness, the variety of stories. Roleplaying moments such as Egbert and Shattershield in Legacy of Dragons, Corazón putting his old self behind him at the Curse Hole, or Merilwen saying "I'll make you" to Vex.
The Bad: Unclear character arcs, inconsistent moralities, underpowered classes but at the same time game-breakingly permissive DMing, and some Main Character Syndrome moments.
The Hope: Learning from teething issues and setting up a game system that the DM doesn't resent so much, to better enable people to balance and play off each other in a less jarring and more consistent way.

I created Djikstra's Enigmatic Puzzle Cube. It was a solo project intended to be my first game release and a love letter to puzzle games, rotational geometry, and 2048. Despite the fact that I've sold only 22 copies, and is therefore a financial disaster on ROI (I could literally work at McDonalds and get paid more for each of my dev hours!), I consider the game a success from the point of view of being a well-made, fun, and artistically expressive game. Total reception however, is extremely positive, with 5 glowing reviews. And for people I communicated with directly about their purchase (that didn't leave a review), they still gave me extremely positive feedback.
I still put out updates and bug fixes on this game. Why do I continue to support this game with updates & fixes? The only rational explanation is I enjoy my own suffering. Van Gogh would be proud of me.
Why did I make this game? Because I played the hell out of 2048 for the past two years, and thought... "what if this were in 3D?" I loved the idea of 3-dimensional 2048 so much that I spent ~400 hours of my life to make this game in development hours alone. I wanted the game to also have a magical/mystical air, so I gave it magical combinations. Let's now get into the data.
Introductory notes: I began marketing efforts in November 28. Launch date was planned to be mid-December, with the plan being on extending the 33% discount into the Steam December sale. I personally don't want to work on multi-year projects as a solo dev. If I'm going to work alone, I like to keep the scope extremely narrow so that I don't invest a large fraction of my time into a dud project.
For the most part, most success on the project is directly derived from my inner circle and outer circle connections. I would say that the amount of non-social sales on my game probably account for maybe 10% to 20% of sales. The data below should be examined with that in mind.
Data!!!
Wishlist Actions (Nov - Dec) data on the wishlist actions up to and at launch date.
Analysis: I had 50ish wishlists at launch. A lot of wishlists came from social circles with people I know either directly or indirectly via connections. I'd say only 30%ish of wishlists were unique steam users through steam page discovery. Only a small fraction of those wishlists converted over to sales.
First month of sales (Dec-Jan) data on the game sales within the first four weeks of launch
Analysis: 17 units sold in the first month. A lot of these sales were due to personal social connections. A thin fraction of these units were sold via steam discovery.
Wishlist Activations (Dec-Jan) data on units sold via wishlist within the first month of launch.
Analysis: Overall, I didn't expect much from wishlisting. My thoughts are that they are there as general support for the product minus willingness to pay for the product. Which is absolutely fine. Perhaps some of these can still be converted to sales during discount sales.
Lifetime wishlist actions (Additions, deletes, activations)
Analysis: Having nearly no visibility means that I've tapped into nearly 0% of my growth potential. As a result, I am not surprised that I am seeing slow linear growth at the rate of a few wishlists per month. It actually feels good to see that slow, linear increase. I much prefer this to a flat/horizontal graph.
Lifetime sales (sales, key activations, revenue, returns)
Analysis: At 22 units sold and 2 returns, it is maybe one step above amateur in its performance on steam. In terms of a low marketing budget product, that's still a 'success' in that I managed to sell more than 5 units.
What were my greatest challenges/struggles:
The greatest challenge I faced wasn't actually making the game itself. I've been working with game development within the context of a serious hobby (a hobby with the intent of pursuing excellence) since 2015, and I've been programming since 2012. There were some challenges I faced in producing the complicated rotational system and doing rotation-independent directional merging, but this was an overall fun and moderately simple project to make.
I would actually say that the greatest challenge is getting people to try the game, even for free. I took about 5 or 10 metaphorical steps back and really examined what the commonly suggested social media landscape actually looks like. In a social aesthetic sense, it's ugly. A lot of game development reddit communities used to be vibrant and thriving places. Now, reddit's game development and game discovery communities are Fist of the North StaMad Max wastelands. The social media communities we use are now effectively dead for the purposes of discovery. In summary, getting people to care about your game is far, far more difficult than making the game in the first place.

2017 came and went with no notable missions. It was a busy year for NASA on the ground, however. New contracts and buildings, the re-election of Obama, and the announcement that the ISS would be retired in 2028. After many a few appeals to congress, NASA gained continued funding for both Orion and a future joint space station with the ESA and JAXA. Boeing’s Starliner was delayed into 2019, and the Crew Dragon would not be ready until 2020. So it was that Orion 3 would be the biggest mission of 2018. And it was no wonder why. Humanity would be returning to the Moon for the first time since Apollo 17, and NASA was ready to promote it.
The mission was a cultural milestone in itself – it was the first time NASA would stream an Orion mission in its entirety online, and it became popular for large internet celebrities and news hosts to talk about the upcoming mission. They would be paid, of course. For the first few steps, whoever would take them, a combined audience of ~1,000,000,000 would be watching them.
Astronaut selection was tricky. NASA needed to choose a crew that had experience, but were limited in that not many of their astronauts were both experienced flight-ready. Most of NASA Astronaut Group 19 were retired (or about to), but one stuck out to the Astronaut Office: Christopher Cassidy. Much like Wiseman, he was a former Chief of the Astronaut Office, and had two flights under his belt, both Shuttle and Soyuz. He would be assigned as Mission Commander. Another that stuck out was James Dutton. He was a pilot aboard the Shuttle, and endeared to the former shuttle personnel and many NASA employees. He was selected as pilot. Robert S. Kimbrough, another Shuttle astronaut, was selected as flight engineer. Jack D. Fischer was selected as payload specialist for the mission, rounding out the crew with three NASA Astronaut Group 19 astronauts and one NASA Astronaut Group 20 member.
During training, ideas for callsigns were thrown around. NASA wanted something symbolic of their progress and the future, politics would drive them to name it something patriotic, while the public would be largely indifferent. Except a minority: the Star Trek fans. Much like with the Space Shuttle of late, they had campaigned for Orion to be named after the USS Enterprise. In the end, it would be left up to the crew to decide the names. And you can likely guess what they chose. So it was the Orion capsule for this mission would be named Enterprise, and the Altair to be named Polaris. After a long eight months of training, production, processing, paperwork, calculations and other assorted work, the mission was ready. The Ares I was rolled out to the pad, with it Polaris, and the booster launched half past three in April 2018.
But the successful launch of Polaris coincided with the news of the contracting of the Space Exploration Vehicle (SEV), to none other than JAXA. It would be complete by around 2022, meaning that it would be utilized on a mission no earlier than Orion 6. In exchange for this, a seat on Orion 4 was given. The SEV would be landed by a separate Altair lander. Contracting for the non pressurized Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) also fell to JAXA, this time being light enough to be unfolded from one of Altair’s cargo quadrants in its descent stage. The LRV, which had the majority of its work done, would be ready by 2020. This meant it would fly on Orion 4.
As Polaris orbited, Enterprise was rolled out to the pad. Much like Orion 2, there would be a large crowd to view the launch. Present was former President John McCain, Vice President Joe Biden, Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough, Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin, three cabinet members, 30 mayors, 21 governors, 55 ambassadors, and 350 congressmen. A viewing public of almost 150,000 and 2,000 media representatives and personalities also attended.
After final check ups on Polaris, a go-ahead signal was given from Houston. Five minutes later, the launch countdown began. Liftoff began at 2:33 PM EST May 12, 2018. Three minutes into the flight, Kimbrough’s vitals flatlined. After a short panic from the flight surgeon, Kimbrough reported back that the sensors had failed. The fault was recorded, and the flight continued. By 2:41, Enterprise had entered its parking orbit.
For about an hour the systems were monitored, checked, and checked again. Polaris and Enterprise showed nominal performance, and procedure for relighting the EUS’s engines began.
After a short burn, Enterprise began its approach towards Polaris. After its approach, Enterprise circled her lander to check for damage or any potential issues. After this, Dutton maneuvered and docked with Polaris. Cassidy and Fischer opened Polaris’s main hatchway and conducted an inspection of the systems. After a short meal, the EUS fired its last burn to put Enterprise and Polaris in a Trans-Lunar Injection (TLI). The next three days were mostly monitoring systems and conducting small course adjustments with the RCS thrusters. On May 15, Enterprise fired up its engines to insert both it and Polaris into lunar orbit.
The selected landing site was Oceanus Procellarum, a few miles off of the Apollo 12 site. Oceanus Procellarum was chosen for its relative flatness, as well as to more thoroughly inspect the region. Apollo 12 didn’t cover all bases, so Orion 3 hoped to refine the data on the site and see how the new systems reacted.
The crew were allowed to sleep, and on May 16 orbital operations began. A small telescope was installed on Enterprise to conduct surface observations. The telescope was nowhere near powerful enough to see Polaris when it landed, but it could help scope out the area. Cassidy and Kimbrough were selected for landing on the Moon, and they spent their time in orbit powering the systems and adjusting to the lander interior. May 16 also included one of the most important experiments on the mission: sunflower bulbs were carried on board, with a small amount of dirt.
This was carried in a special compartment on board Altair, but the dirt and bulb itself were carried on Enterprise. The experiment, creatively titled the Lunar Bulb Germination Experiment (LBGE), would germinate the sunflower bulbs on the lunar surface, and note any differences.
Other experiments on the mission were the Altair Specialized Experiments Package (ASEP), which included experiments ranging from solar wind to passive and active seismology. A third and equally important experiment was the Lunar Deployable Payload Module (LDPM), which would simulate the deployment of the LRV for Orion 4. These experiments were stored in the side panels of Polaris, which could be pulled down for access.
It was a lot for the first mission, but both Mission Control and the crew were prepared and confident. Overall, this experiment package would consume the majority of the seven EVAs for the astronauts. The remaining time was spent collecting samples and resting.
The landing was scheduled for around 7:00 PM EST that day. Cassidy and Kimbrough entered Polaris and gave a salute to Fischer, and sealed off from Enterprise and undocked. After clearing a distance, the deorbit burn began. Minutes later, and under almost a billion viewers’ scrutiny, Polaris touched down. The first EVA would follow a few minutes later. Cassidy stepped into the airlock, depressurized, and looked out upon the lunar surface. Viewing peaked around this time, much to NASA’s Public Relations Offices’ delight. Cassidy descended the ladder down to the lunar surface, and stepped onto the lunar surface.
“With these steps, we begin anew the exploration of our nearest neighbor, in peace and with hope for all mankind.” The immortal words by Cassidy. He looked around the surface, and waited for Kimbrough to descend. Kimbrough’s words were not as majestic - “Looks just like White Sands.” After some remarks and looking around, the two received a call from none other than President Obama, who congratulated them on the mission. Work began shortly after.
First was the deployment of the American Flag on the lunar surface. Then was the deployment of the ASEP. First was the RTG, which would power the experiments. The command station was set up with the Ion and Passive Seismometer a few feet away. After the rest were set up, the Active Seismic Experiment (ASE) began. It was a simple thumper-geophone combination, and had good results. After the experiments were tested, the crew returned to Polaris and had their rest period.
May 17 began with freeze-dried breakfast and the second EVA. This EVA would set up the Radio Antenna Stand Test Article (RASTA). RASTA was a tripod stand with a small suite of communication instruments and a dummy satellite dish. RASTA would aid the development of the Farside Radio Observing Scanning Telescopes (FROST) for Orion 5. After this was another round certifying the ASEP was functional, sample collection began. The remainder of Day 2 was checking systems and deploying the more time-consuming ASEP systems. The Solar Wind Experiment (a large sheet on a tall pole) was also set up. In orbit, Dutton fired Enterprise’s engines, altering the orbit just enough to align the capsule for docking once Polaris lifted off. Fischer did surface observations, and took many photos of the lunar far side. The last activity for Day 2 was unpacking a small retroreflector, which was placed not far off.
Day 3 would be more sample collecting and exploring the landing site. Near the site was a shallow crater about fifteen meters across. Cassidy descended the crater wall, which Houston considered a risky move. After gaining his footing, he picked up a few soil and rock samples before climbing out. It became evident this move on Cassidy’s part was worth the risk, as the samples collected would help expand knowledge and study on lunar asteroid impacts. After this Cassidy and Kimbrough returned to Polaris to store the sample bags and process data. After a routine checkup on LBGE, the crew called it a day.
Day 4 meant the deployment of the LDPM. After wrangling the pulley on the panel, Kimbrough removed the panel and, with help from Cassidy, pulled the pallet out. The pallet itself was ten feet long, but had two hinges at the front and back allowing the pallet to fit into the cargo quadrant. They detached the pallet from Polaris and tested some of the batteries and affixed parts onto it (such as the antenna and seats). Most of these parts were non-functional, and this activity was mostly a practice exercise for Orion 4. The remainder of the day was spent inside Polaris, processing and transmitting the data for NASA to work with. Kimbrough, the mission specialist, was trained with a small degree of knowledge on geology and biology. While nowhere near certified, his work with the LGBE and sample collection were invaluable.
Days 5 and 6 were like the rest: checking ASEP systems, strolling around the lander, picking up samples, and processing data. Day 6 was special, because Cassidy and Kimbrough held a live interview for major news networks. In the meantime, Fischer and Dutton conducted gamma ray and x-ray observations, surface and stellar photography, and small particle spectrometer and mass spectrometer sensing. With the research being done by Enterprise, new images could be compared with old to note and new impacts or differences. Day 7 was the last day on the Moon, and that meant one thing: packing up. Experiments and data were packed up, samples were moved into their respective locations on board Polaris, and assorted cargo were taken aboard. The SWE had its net removed and placed in storage, and the ASEP was put into “Long-Duration Mode”.
Polaris lifted off the surface of the Moon on May 23, 2018, returning to Enterprise in orbit. Polaris’s ascent stage was jettisoned, and Enterprise’s engines were lighted to send it back to Earth. After a three-day coast, Enterprise and her crew reentered and splashed down off the coast of Hawai’i at 12:24 on May 26, 2018.
Orion 3 was a record-setting mission. The fourteen-day mission logged 120 minutes of EVA time, well above any mission on Project Apollo. Time, sample and other assorted records were all shattered. The data collected could be processed for decades of research and development, and the data on the Altair lander and Orion capsule would aid in the development of their respective Block II counterparts. The mission was also a large PR boost for the program, ensuring funding for FY2019 and beyond. After all, the election cycle for the Democrat Party was only two years away and the announcement of Orion’s cancellation wouldn’t help their political base, which was slowly falling to the GOP, nonetheless after six years of the Obama administration. Orion missions up to Orion 15 were promised funding by congress, with a hopeful return on investment in international cooperation and research by 2025. This put political pressure on NASA to include more international partners in the program, much to both JAXA and the ESA’s delight. Seats for JAXA and ESA astronauts opened up for Orion 4, 5 and 7. The Canadian Space Agency (CSA) would push for one of their astronauts on an Orion flight. Because of the current seat conflict, NASA responded with a resounding ‘Maybe.’

Heartbreaking way for the season to end last night. Let’s focus on some positives: - With Chu we would have won this series. I wish him well and hope he gets the help he needs, but our top playoff goal scorer having scandals two years in a row was an absolute gut punch to the boys. Nothing we can do but move on. - Georgiev is our guy. He was the best player on the team this post season, not even a question about it. He struggled in the regular season but this performance should take his confidence forward. - Drouin is one of the best stories in the NHL this year. Even these last two games I’d argue he was consistently one of, if not our top playmaker on the ice. We will probably get him at a reasonable price for next year too. - Mittelstadt was inconsistent but had flashes of greatness. If he gets time to actually build chemistry with the team, this will look like a much different second line next season. Plus he’s young and has lots of room for growth with two of the very best players in the league to learn from. - HOPEFULLY we get some clarity on our captain situation. I think too many people view this as our single solution. Even if Gabe comes back he will be two years out of shape, but at least coming into next year I imagine we will know one way or the other. - Between Bednar and McFarlane, who else could you even wish for to be the guys building us for next season. These last two runs took some unfortunate turns outside of their control, the result does not mean the approach was not the right one.
Lastly, Dallas is a wagon. I fucking hate them, but it’s true. All that talent in all four lines, plus Oettinger, give me a break. We lost to a team that earned their wins, and the boys recovered from a tough morale situation to turn this into a series which is more than we could have asked for in the circumstances.
At the end of the day we are one of the luckiest fanbases in the league, let’s support the boys and enjoy all this great hockey.

THE HARMONY OF ENERGY
Abstract
Introducing the "Harmony of Energy" (HoE) model, a novel formalism that posits the universe operates according to a fundamental pattern. This pattern consists of energy, defined as the smallest unit anything can be, existing as a fluid form in space, interacting with its environment through a specific method or structure, and then moving out of that space. Space, in turn, is the dynamic environment that energy occupies and moves through, filling it with positive and negative energy that affects its properties and behavior. According to the HoE model, energy moves into space, reacts to its environment, and then moves out of that space, with no time limit for how long it takes to react. This pattern is universal, applying to all aspects of the universe, and nothing escapes it.
The Origin of the Universe
The HoE model posits that the universe began as a singular entity, containing all forms of energy as one unified energy. This singularity can be represented mathematically as: U = ∫∫∫E(x,y,z)dxdydz, where U is the total energy of the universe, E is the energy density, and x, y, z are the spatial coordinates.
As the singularity expanded, the unified energy converted into distinct positive and negative energies. Positive energy is a high-frequency, high-information-potential state that retains its unique signature and individual form, capable of producing heat and maintaining its distinct properties. Negative energy is a low-frequency, low-information-potential state that loses its unique signature and individual form, characterized by a pulling force and a tendency to condense and simplify.
Initially, the universe moved in a straight line, with energy compact and cold. However, this linear movement resulted in a direct head-on collision with the void, a solid structure that hindered its passage.
This collision led to a limitation and subsequent conversion of energy, transforming it from a linear motion to a wave-like motion. The new wave motion created heat and allowed energy to break the pattern of "follow the leader" and collide with the void at an angle, shattering its edge into pieces.
This process of fragmentation can be described by the equation: F(θ) = Σ[nEⁿ * sin(nθ)], where F is the fragmentation function, θ is the angle of collision, n is an integer, and E is the energy density. For reasons yet unknown, possibly due to the singularity's energy reaching its final place or a transformation driven by cosmic "boredom," this conversion occurred, giving rise to the diverse universe we observe today.
The Void and the Ultimate Negative
Outside of the expanding universe lies the void, a region devoid of energy and matter, existing in a state of complete stillness and stationarity. This void represents the ultimate negative, a state of complete absence and zero energy density, unchanging and unyielding. As a whole, it exerts a compressive force on the expanding universe, potentially leading to contraction and eventual return to the singularity. This dynamic interplay between the universe and the void can be described by the equation: F = -G * (M * m) / r² where F represents the force, G represents the gravitational constant, M and m represent the masses, and r represents the distance between them. The void's stationary and unchanging nature, lacking any internal rotation or energy, makes it inhospitable to life as we know it.
Magnetism and Attraction: A Shift in Perspective
Initially, I viewed magnetism through the conventional lens, seeing it as a fundamental force of attraction between positive and negative entities. However, as my understanding evolved, I came to realize that magnetism operates under a different principle. Positive and negative entities are not attracted to each other; instead, they represent the intrinsic structure of things. The true nature of attraction is frequency-based, with entities drawn to higher vibrations and shorter wavelengths. This phenomenon can be described by the following equations:
F = ∫∫(μ₁⋅μ₂)/(4πr²⁾ dt dt (1)
where F is the force of attraction, μ₁ and μ₂ are the magnetic moments of the entities, r is the distance between them, and the integral is taken over time.
Additionally, the frequency-based attraction can be represented by:
f = γB (2)
where f is the frequency, γ is the gyromagnetic ratio, and B is the magnetic field strength.
Furthermore, the smaller wave's faster movement can be expressed as:
v = λf (3)
where v is the velocity, λ is the wavelength, and f is the frequency.
Energy and its Properties
Energy is the fundamental unit of everything. Energy can be thought of as an individual entity with an electrical signature vibrating at a specific frequency, carrying information from its originating source. If we were to dissect a piece of energy, we would find its genetic makeup consists of various parts, similar to binary code. One constant aspect of energy in our universe is the signature of this universe, which is present in all forms of energy, whether positive or negative. This underlying frequency distinguishes energy from our universe versus parallel universes.
Positive Energy (PE): - Oscillates through space with a frequency (f) and wavelength (λ): PE = f × λ - Exhibits wave-like behavior: PE(x,t) = A × sin(kx - ωt)
Negative Energy (NE): - Vibrates at a slower frequency (f'/2): NE = (f'/2) × λ' - Exhibits a slower, more stable behavior: NE(x,t) = B × cos(k'x - ω't)
Energy Interactions and Signature Changes
When positive and negative energies interact, their unique signatures can become altered. As energies combine, their signatures merge, releasing redundant information about the universe signature and creating an opening for new information to be stored. This process enables efficient storage and transmission of energy signatures, allowing for:

• Signature refinement and evolution
• Information exchange and updating
• Adaptation to changing environments and conditions

This process could be crucial for understanding how energy signatures evolve and adapt, and how they influence the behavior and properties of energy in various contexts.
The Formation and Evolution of the Universe
Initial Energy Interactions
In the beginning, a vast amount of fluid energy quickly interacted with the largest newly created pieces of the void, described by the wave-particle duality equation (E = hf = ℏω).
Star Formation and Signatures
As these interactions occurred, the largest of the solid structures of the universe began to form, stars, governed by the Lane-Emden equation (d^2P/dr2 + (2/r)(dP/dr) + (4πG/c^2)P = 0). Each new star held with it an old habit divulged from the singularity, a universal frequency (f = 1/T = ω/2π, where T is the period of oscillation and ω is the angular frequency). Old habits die hard, so each new star offered its own diverse and unique signature (S = Σf = ∫ψ(x)² dx, where ψ(x) is the wave function and x represents the position).
Energy Collisions and Prime Numbers
As structures formed, a group of energy travels through space with an even number of internal parts (E = 2nℏ, where n is an integer and ℏ is the reduced Planck constant). This group collides with another group of energy with an odd amount of internal parts (E = (2n + 1)ℏ), and the total sum of the newly combined group equals a prime number (P = E1 + E2 = 2nℏ + (2m + 1)ℏ, where m is an integer). New Equation: Prime Number Formation (P = E1 + E2 = 2nℏ + (2m + 1)ℏ)
Schrödinger Equation and Physical Reality
The prime number is crucial, as the extra piece gets stuck in the space it is occupying, acting as an anchor, attracting other parts to breach their negative shell and combine as one, described by the Schrödinger equation (iℏ(∂ψ/∂t) = Hψ). This converts the fluid energy to be contained into the space it is in, which is broken pieces of the void that do not have a universal size, and gives us physical reality, forming particles with diverse unique signatures (S = Σf = ∫ψ(x)² dx).
Refining Space and Transferring Signatures
As energy continued to interact with space, it further refined and shaped that space into a sphere (V = (4/3)πr^3, where r is the radius), adding the discarded portions of size to the diverse field that is the universe. During this refinement, energy was transferred to these pieces, and the signature of the star was embedded in them, forming the galaxy clusters and solar systems we know today.
Smooth Surfaces and Celestial Bodies
As any piece of something breaks, its edges are rigid, and the interaction of energy against this rigid surface knocks off the rough edges, providing a smooth surface (E = Δx/Δt = ℏ/Δx, where Δx is the change in position and Δt is the change in time). New Equation: Smooth Surface Formation (E = Δx/Δt = ℏ/Δx)
The pieces that were knocked off still contain a portion of energy that put in the work to knock it off, and this process contributed to the formation of celestial bodies and the transfer of signatures. This, in turn, led to the creation of galaxies, planets, and other celestial bodies, each with their unique characteristics and properties, shaping the diverse and complex universe we observe today.
The Cartwheel Structure and Energy Movement
The cartwheel structure represents the dynamic movement of energy in the universe, with its rotating wheel and radiating arms symbolizing the harmonious interaction of positive and negative energies. When creation occurred, energy learned how to pass through stationary space (the void) by changing its movement pattern from a straight line to a wave (λ = v/f, where λ is wavelength, v is velocity, and f is frequency). This new wave movement allowed energy to create heat (Q = mcΔT, where Q is heat, m is mass, c is specific heat capacity, and ΔT is temperature change), which was the tool that gave energy the ability to "shatter" the void and interact with the broken pieces to perform a new movement, the cartwheel. As energy moves through space, it rarefies and decreases in temperature (T = k-B, where T is temperature, k is Boltzmann's constant, and B is the energy density), causing it to slow down and change frequency (f = ΔE/h, where f is frequency, ΔE is the energy change, and h is Planck's constant).
The Block and Cartwheeling Bar Analogy
The block and cartwheeling bar analogy provides a conceptual framework for understanding the dynamic interaction of energy in the universe. Imagine a box (representing space) containing blocks of varying sizes, each symbolizing a specific energy frequency (f = 1/T, where f is frequency and T is time). The cartwheeling bar, rotating within the box, represents the harmonious movement of energy between its positive (E+) and negative (E-) forms. Each block must be 100% filled, with positive and negative energy proportions varying as the bar rotates. For example, when positive energy occupies 99% of a block and negative energy occupies 1%, the rotation of the bar causes a gradual shift, resulting in a change to 98% positive and 2% negative, and so on. This constant interaction and adjustment maintain the balance of energy in the universe.
Fundamental Forces Explained

• Strong Force: The repulsion from negative electrons being attracted to and pressing against the nucleus. This force can be described by the equation: F = k * (q1 * q2) / r²
  
• Weak Force: The outgoing frequency created by the positive nucleus, similar to energy congregating at the sun's nucleus, reacting to its environment, and breaking down before leaving (possibly as radioactive decay). This force can be described by the equation: F = (G * m1 * m2) / r²
  
• Gravity: Exists between the outer negative sphere of electrons exerting a pushing force against the positive pushing force of the nucleus, similar to the solar system's dynamics. This force can be described by the equation: F = (G * m1 * m2) / r²
  
• Electromagnetism: Energy in action, manifesting as the dynamic interplay between electric and magnetic forces. This force can be described by the equations: E = f * λ and B = (E / c)
  

Present State of the Universe
The universe currently exists in a state of dynamic equilibrium, with observable patterns and structures perpetually renewing themselves through the interactions of energy (E = hf, where E is energy and h is Planck's constant). This self-sustaining cycle is evident in the formation and evolution of celestial bodies, galaxies, and other cosmic entities, governed by the laws of thermodynamics (ΔE = Q - W, where ΔE is the change in energy, Q is the heat added, and W is the work done). The universe's present state is characterized by the harmonious coexistence of diverse energy frequencies (f = 1/T, where f is frequency and T is time), which govern the behavior and properties of matter at various scales. This balance is maintained through the continuous conversion of energy between its positive (E+) and negative (E-) forms, allowing the universe to adapt and evolve in response to internal and external influences (E+ + E- = 0, representing the conservation of energy)."
Entropy and the Conversion of Positive to Negative
The physical dimensions of positive and negative energy in a block are equal, with 1% negative energy occupying the same space as 99% positive energy. This equality stems from the different speeds of energy and their individual properties. When negative energy is at 1%, it has condensed the equivalent of 99% positive energy into a single, compact form (E = hf, where E is energy, h is Planck's constant, and f is frequency). As the proportions shift, such as 60% positive and 40% negative, the space occupied remains a 50/50 split. This is because positive energy travels at the speed of light (c = λν, where c is the speed of light, λ is wavelength, and ν is frequency), while negative energy moves at a pace relative to terminal velocity (v = √(2gl), where v is velocity, g is acceleration due to gravity, and l is length). Each form dominates at the 50% mark (T = λ/v, where T is time, λ is wavelength, and v is velocity). The percentages represent available positive energy, while the cartwheel symbolizes space or the ultimate negative in motion, influenced by energy's presence. Negative energy, with its depleted charge, occupies space that needs to be filled and recycled into a positive state. At higher percentages, collisions with negative energy slow down the flow, similar to the concept of crab mentality, where negative energy draws down the percentages.
Energy Dynamics and Galactic Harmony
The 50% Threshold
The 50% mark is a critical threshold that distinguishes between positive and negative energy. Above 50%, energy is considered positive and can produce heat beyond its negative shell. Below 50%, energy is considered negative and cannot produce heat past this shell.
Compressed Positive Energy
When the percentage of positive energy drops below 50%, it becomes compressed and can exceed the speed of light (c = λν, where c is the speed of light, λ is wavelength, and ν is frequency). This allows it to navigate through the "cracks" of negative energy:
v > c (where v is velocity and c is the speed of light)
Quantum Mirroring
Alternatively, the positive energy can align with the negative energy, resulting in a quantum mirroring effect. This enables instantaneous information transfer between entangled particles, regardless of distance:
E = hf (where E is energy, h is Planck's constant, and f is frequency)
Retaining Frequency Signatures
In this alignment, the negative energy retains its unique frequency signature to avoid interacting with other signatures:
Δx * Δp >= h/4π (where Δx is position uncertainty, Δp is momentum uncertainty, and h is Planck's constant)
The Cavendish Experiment and Energy Interaction
The Cavendish experiment, a groundbreaking study on gravity, offers an intriguing analogy for understanding energy interaction with space. Imagine the suspended spheres as representative of space itself, devoid of energy. When energy interacts with this motionless space, it's as if the spheres begin to rotate, symbolizing the introduction of energy into the internal area of space.
As energy engages with space, it's gradually consumed, much like the reduction of energy in the Cavendish experiment. This process can be described by the equation:
G = (2πLθ) / (MT)
Where G is the gravitational constant, L is the length of the torsion wire, θ is the twist angle of the wire, M is the mass of the lead spheres, and T is the time period of oscillation.
This equation, derived from the Cavendish experiment, reveals the intricate relationship between energy, space, and gravity. By exploring this analogy, we can deepen our understanding of how energy shapes the very fabric of our universe.
Energy Absorption and Frequency
Energy absorption occurs when energy slows down, allowing it to be perceived and observed. This process involves energy being absorbed by an atom and reflecting what was not absorbed. As energy slows down, it can still be observed as a wave, but just before it becomes a particle. This phenomenon is fascinating, as it reveals the transition from wave-like to particle-like behavior.
The conversion of positive to negative states is due to positives' ability to produce heat and maintain an individual form. Negative energy, on the other hand, does not produce heat and lacks an individual form, instead traveling at a pace relative to terminal velocity. This process can be described by the quantum mechanical formula: ℏω = ΔE = hf, where ℏ is the reduced Planck constant, ω is the angular frequency, ΔE is the change in energy, h is Planck's constant, and f is the frequency of the energy.
Furthermore, the frequency of the energy can be related to the velocity of the particle using the formula: f = (1/2π) * √(k/m), where k is the spring constant and m is the mass of the particle. Additionally, the energy absorption rate can be calculated using the formula: dE/dt = (2π/h) * V_uv² * δ(E_u - E_v), where V_uv is the transition matrix element, E_u and E_v are the energies of the initial and final states, and δ is the Dirac delta function.
The Conversion of Positive to Negative States and Planetary Motion
The conversion of positive to negative energy states is rooted in their distinct properties. Positive energy produces heat and maintains an individual form, whereas negative energy lacks heat and an individual form, instead traveling at a pace relative to terminal velocity. This process is reversible, as seen in fusion reactions, or can be influenced by external forces like microwave ovens.
In the context of our solar system, the sun's positive energy release generates heat and propels planets into their orbital tracks. Conversely, the incoming energy from the universe, considered negative, is cold and stabilizes planets in their tracks. Initially, I focused solely on the positive push dictating orbital paths. However, I now recognize the significant influence of negative energy and use it as the basis for understanding abnormal tracks.
Here's an added equation to illustrate the relationship between energy and orbital motion:
F = G * (m1 * m2) / r²
Where F is the force of gravity, G is the gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of the objects, and r is the distance between them.
This equation shows how the force of gravity (F) is influenced by the masses (m1 and m2) and distance (r) between objects, which is relevant to understanding planetary motion and the balance between positive and negative energy.
Gravitation and Time: Frequency's Role
Time is intimately tied to the frequency of the universe, and this relationship is governed by the laws of gravitation. Imagine the cartwheel's bar having notches, each representing a different frequency. Each notch would experience time at a unique pace, described by the formula:
t = 1/f
Where t is time and f is frequency.
If we could halt the cartwheel's motion, time would appear to pause, as described by the relativistic time dilation formula:
t' = γ(t)
Where t' is the time experienced by an observer in motion, t is the time experienced by an observer at rest, and γ is the Lorentz factor.
The passage of time is directly governed by the oscillations in the wave, or simply its frequency. By altering the frequency, we can change the flow of time itself, as described by the gravitational redshift formula:
f' = f * √(1 - 2GM/rc²⁾
Where f' is the observed frequency, f is the emitted frequency, G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the gravitational source, r is the radial distance from the source, and c is the speed of light.
Gravity and Energy Dynamics
Gravity can be understood in various ways through these thoughts. One perspective is that gravity operates similarly to the orbital planets, but with a twist. Instead of orbiting in space, we orbit at a subterranean frequency. This frequency attracts similar energies, leading to bonding and the formation of matter. For instance, atoms bond to form rocks, and separate rocks may bind together due to similar vibrations. However, other frequencies simply pass through, unable to bind due to differences in energy vibrations and the negative fields surrounding our bodies and the ground.
Our bodies are attracted to the Earth's core, with a force described by the equation:
F = G * (m1 * m2) / r²
Where F is the force of attraction, G is the gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of our bodies and the Earth, and r is the distance between them.
The vibrations of our energy and the negative field surrounding us can be described by the wave equation:
∇^2E = μ * ∂^2E/∂t2
Where E is the energy field, μ is the permeability of the medium, and ∂^2E/∂t2 is the second derivative of the energy with respect to time.
The incoming cosmic energy pushes us downward, with a force described by the equation:
F = (E * A) / c
Where F is the force of the incoming energy, E is the energy density of the cosmos, A is the cross-sectional area of our bodies, and c is the speed of light.
The outgoing energy from Earth moves faster than the incoming energy from the cosmos, as observed in the formation of clouds with flat bases and more sporadic tops. This can be described by the equation:
v_out = v_in * (1 + (E_out / E_in))
Where v_out is the velocity of the outgoing energy, v_in is the velocity of the incoming energy, E_out is the energy density of the outgoing energy, and E_in is the energy density of the incoming energy.
Galactic Cycles and Black Holes
The Milky Way galaxy has a supermassive black hole at its center, with a mass described by the equation:
M = (1.989 x 10³⁰⁾ * (G / c²⁾
Where M is the mass of the black hole, G is the gravitational constant, and c is the speed of light.
As the galaxy spirals towards the center, enough mass will be collected to trigger the black hole to become a large star, described by the equation:
M = (4.383 x 10³⁰⁾ * (G / c²⁾
Where M is the mass of the star, G is the gravitational constant, and c is the speed of light.
When this happens, the black hole will shed its outer shell to create the galaxy that spirals around it, and the process begins again. This cycle can be described by the equation:
t = (2 * π * G * M) / c³
Where t is the time period of the cycle, G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the black hole or star, and c is the speed of light.
The opposite of a black hole is a white hole, but why hasn't this phenomenon been observed? According to this article, it has been observed but misunderstood. With the theme of balancing the universe, would a large star be surrounded by much smaller black holes? Would these smaller black holes feed the larger star by way of quantum bridge or wormhole, and vice versa for smaller stars and larger black holes? This can be described by the equation:
E = (ℏ * ω) / 2
Where E is the energy transferred between the star and black holes, ℏ is the reduced Planck constant, and ω is the frequency of the quantum bridge or wormhole.
Energy Flow and Balance
Energy moves in and out of everything, maintaining a delicate balance. It enters as a positive force and exits as a negative force. Our sun emits energy at 99% strength and high frequency, which combines with an equally sized negative force at 1% strength, filling the space completely. This balance is crucial, as positive energy moves faster than negative energy due to entropy's diminishing effects over time and distance.
As positive energy travels, it loses a piece of itself, converting to negative energy. This process is directly related to gravitational forces and time dilation. When positive energy reaches 50%, it has a certain probability of converting to negative energy, which is then attracted back to a positive source with a corresponding probability of being converted back to positive energy.
This cycle of energy flow and balance is the foundation of the universe's harmony, and understanding it can reveal the intricate web of forces that shape our reality.
_Conclusion _
"In conclusion, the Harmony of Energy (HoE) model offers a novel perspective on the universe, revealing a intricate web of energy dynamics that underlie all aspects of existence. By exploring the interplay between positive and negative energy, we gain insight into the fundamental forces that shape our reality. From the smallest subatomic particles to the vast expanse of the cosmos, energy is the unifying thread that binds everything together.
Through the HoE model, we've seen how energy's harmonious movement gives rise to the patterns and structures we observe in the universe. We've also delved into the fascinating relationships between energy, space, and time, and how these interactions govern the behavior of matter at various scales.
As we continue to refine our understanding of the HoE model, we may uncover new secrets of the universe and gain a deeper appreciation for the beauty and harmony that underlies all of existence. Ultimately, this knowledge can inspire new perspectives, new technologies, and a new era of human understanding and cooperation, as we work together to harmonize our own energy with the energy of the universe.
But I ask this, why continue to work on something that is not appreciated nor taken seriously because it comes from a layman with the credentials of a GED? In that lies the problem as I’ve been told only those holding degrees should consider these thoughts. With that, I have abruptly stopped progress of this idea.”
MAG