Natasha Metaxa (Greek, born 1961)
Azores, n.d.
Oil on canvas 90 x 120 cm
Private collection
TVSTRANGERTHINGS

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year

Origami Around

pixel skylines
Xuebing Du

if i look back, i am lost
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
RMH
KIROKAZE
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Three Goblin Art

oozey mess
trying on a metaphor
NASA
occasionally subtle

titsay
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
AnasAbdin

#extradirty

seen from Canada
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Costa Rica
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Brazil
seen from United States

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States

seen from Belgium

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from India
@calleytheginge
Natasha Metaxa (Greek, born 1961)
Azores, n.d.
Oil on canvas 90 x 120 cm
Private collection
in happier pride news i actually found this deeply heartwarming
that's solidarity baybeeee
Further context: Durham city council (Reform UK) cut funding and support for Pride. The Durham Miner's Association and other trade unions raised enough money for Durham Pride 2026 to go ahead - a direct call back to when Lesbian and Gays Support the Miners (LGSM) raised money for mining communities when Margaret Thatcher seized union funding during the miner strikes of 1984-85.
At the 1985 Labour party meet, the motion to support LGBT rights as a party was passed due to a block vote from mining unions.
Stephen Guy, the chair of the Durham Miners’ Association, said that when it became apparent Durham Pride was under threat, he took it upon himself to “encourage the trade union movement to step up and do the right thing, and stand shoulder to shoulder with the LGBT+ community […] They not only raised funds for us, but came to our communities, uplifted our spirits when they were down, and showed their solidarity.”
Panther in the rain.
Happy Wet Beast Wednesday to all those that participate
Fantastic idea
Article about it here.
what’s important to note and missing from the “headline” tweet is that they simultaneously constructed additional good public transit to the public transit already in the city (bus rapid transit, train stations). Just removing highway alone isn’t going to make traffic better, the bigger part of the story is that they improved public transportation. And the current mayor wants to do more - cyclist lanes and reinstate a tram system
The 84 Series
we need to start legally protecting these like make this kind of bathroom part of the national park system
Blue Dragon Guppy, 2020-02-24
(via 「思わず二度見する不思議さ…」タトゥー風の足を持つ猫:らばQ)
somebody cut and pasted the wrong leg onto this cat
this cat looks like a coworker at a restaurant who has been “saving up for the other sleeve” for 5 years
Oyster mermaid~
ah fuck, so sorry ma’am-
#if the portals don't share a reference frame then there's sound logic that gets either answer unfortunately#it isn't properly defined and the vibes can lead you to A or B being correct
wait no please explain, how could it be A? like, genuinely, what is the chain of reasoning for that?
So, following the laws set up in the game, it *would* be...technically neither because portals (except in very specific circumstances) cannot be maintained on moving surfaces.
THAT BEING SAID! If we ignore that part, A would be the correct answer of the two provided options. The reason being, the individuals are not moving, they are stationary. They have no velocity.
The portal is being moved toward them, forcing them through, but that portal's movement does not provide them any acceleration.
The force that would cause them to "fall" in A would be from gravity in this situation.
The portal itself, essentially, is just a hole. If you were to push a hole past a stationary person (or object), that person would remain stationary. The only difference here is that the hole isn't immediately on the other side, but in a different location. For all intents and purposes, it is still just a hole.
okay, but work with me on this one:
The portal is moving at a speed of 1/3rd the length of object A per unit of time T. For convenience i'm gonna go with a 3-meter squared object A and a 1 second time T, so both sides of the portal are moving along at 1m/s. because the two sides are linked, it's basically just a ring passing around object A. The hoop moves forward at a constant speed, and assuming the portal is a massless entity no force is being exerted here.
Now, looking at the same situation, but with one side of the portal being locked at the starting point, and the other side moving at 1m/s:
At time T=0, the moving side of the portal contacts the object and begins moving over it. By time T=1, it has passed over 1/3 of the object, and in doing so has forced 1/3 of the object to exit the orange portal. Because the blue portal is moving at 1m/s, the first third of the object has exited the orange portal at a speed of 1m/s. At time T=2, the portal has traveled another meter forward around the object, and the next 1/3 of the object has exited the orange portal, also traveling at a rate of 1m/s. In a situation where the blue side of the portal does not impart it's velocity to the objects passing through it, as you claim, then if the first third of the object, designated A(1), has already passed through the portal, it should be stationary, and would now be exerting a force equivalent to its mass on the next third of the object, designated A(2). Either way, the portal is creating the same amount of force out of thin air.
like, put it this way: imagine that 1 meter away from the orange portal is an immovable surface. At time T=1 the object contacts that surface but the blue portal keeps moving. From a universal reference frame, what would you expect to have happen? if the object is solid enough to withstand the force, A(2) and A(3) should begin moving with the blue portal, right? and those parts would suddenly be moving at 1m/s relative to a universal reference frame, but from the relative reference frame of the portal nothing would appear to move at all, even as the portals got farther apart from each other. If you assume, however, that a portal should impart no momentum upon the objects passing through it, then the blue portal would continue around the remaining two thirds of object a, and object A would be crushed against the immovable surface, also imparting a force.
Then there's the most wild idea. If object A cannot be compressed, and there is an immovable surface 1m from the orange portal, would it effect the portals movement? Would the blue portal be forced to stop moving, or perhaps would the orange portal be forced to move upwards, to compensate?
That said. Assuming the portals are not impacted by what passes through them, I believe B is the correct answer, based on these ideas.
that said... i can understand why the dev team decided not to fuck with moving portals lol
so the real answer is that it wouldnt be a or b because it would violate the laws of motion. if the answer was B you would be able to make a perpetual motion/infinite energy machine. if the answer was A some kind of catastrophic violation of spacetime would happen?
yes, that's why I have repeatedly referred to portals as free energy machines, both here and in the reblogs. If you can enter one side at low elevation and leave the other side at high elevation without exerting any effort you have fundamentally violated the conservation of energy and generated "Free" gravitational potential energy. There are many other ways in which this can be demonstrated, but i feel like that's the most intuitive one, and the one we see utilized most in the games.
As for the free energy aspects, here is some fun with that reality:
Beyond that, the game's logic simply doesn't apply to reality. Within the context of the game, portals can't exist on moving surfaces. Outside of the context of the game, movement is only defined relative to a reference frame and there are no "non-moving" surfaces anywhere, making all the game logic dependent on an absolute grid. With this absolute grid, A is supported, since velocity is an absolute feature of physics objects in the game. Without the absolute grid, B is supported as motion is relative and all that matters is the rate at which objects cross the barrier of the portal, rather like a speed of extrusion. Either way, the concept of preservation of energy seems to be violated.
What happens if the trolley is changing velocity as it passes over them? What if it reverses? What factor does the friction with surfaces on the other side play? Could this allow a moving portal to drag someone who is holding on to something on the relatively stationary side? Is the trolley paying the energy cost for the friction generated in that scenario? If so, is it also paying an energy cost for imparting momentum to objects passing through the portal? Does the trolley experience each "stationary object" passing through the portal as a collision? Does the object experience the sudden imparting of this energy? Sudden changes in momentum are famously bad for the cohesion of bodies. I suppose there is an option C where they fly out, looking like they were just hit by a trolley...
It is fundamentally unsolvable, but truly fertile ground for endless debate and thought experiments, so keep thinking about it from as many angles as you can.
Just swimming by to say hello. 🦭
My illustrations the most based poem about tigers by Nael, age 6
Every time I read it I feel space inside my chest expand in very *emotion* way.
It’s called ‘being able to see the corpse’
So if I put you in an L-shaped swimming pool, and you knew there was a corpse around the corner, you'd be fine?
loving the implication that I'm a little animal and you're a scientist putting me into various bodies of water to test my corpse:water ratio tolerance
[Image ID: Reddit post on r/ShowerThoughts from JollyTraveler reading: People will swim in the ocean, even thought there are definitely many corpses in it. People will not swim in a pool with a corpse in it. Humans all have a corpse:water ratio that is acceptable for them to swim in. /End ID]
A minimum allowable Olympic swimming pool is 660*10^3 gallons.
The ocean is 352*10^18 gallons.
The ocean is as big as 530*10^12 Olympic swimming pools.
Scientific American's estimate of how many humans have ever lived ever is 140*10^9.
If every human who has ever lived ever were currently a corpse in the ocean, that would be equivalent to one corpse per 4000 Olympic swimming pools.
If your town has two Olympic-sized swimming pools and you happen to know that one of them has a corpse in it and you go into the other one, your corpse:water ratio is insanely high compared to getting into the ocean.
someone made a website where you can declare your favorite pokemon & why. let's all see if every pokemon is someone's favorite... Together
:) every pokemon is someone's favorite
The San Francisco Examiner, California, February 25, 1935
Sometimes I think humankind hasn’t changed at all.
WHAT IS “DOES”?
Must... resist... the belly...
it calls out to me....