OKAY SO IM DOING A BIG POST

Background information you will need for my rambling:

Conjecture: a statement that is always true, but needs a proof.

Relatively prime: two (or more) integers that share no common factor besides 1. So, for example, 8 (4x2, or 2^3) and 9 (3x3), are relatively prime.

When you prove something in mathematics, people gather to try to disprove. It’s common in most STEM fields that people need to try to disprove it before accepting it, because you’re working with nature here. Can’t allow a proof that doesn’t apply.

The abc conjecture is seemingly simple. Really. Three positive integers (a, b, and c) are relatively prime. These three integers will satisfy a+b=c.

That sounds so fucking simple. Like, looking at that, it’s so tiny. Let’s look at my above example: 8+9=17. Wow! All relatively prime! All positive integers!! But wait, there’s more!

Let’s look at multiplication within the conjecture. Let’s use 8, 9, and 17 again. Our primes are 2, 3, and 17. Let’s multiply them together! The product is 102. Wow! Much bigger than 17, but what about a case like 5+27=32? Well, our primes are 5, 3, and 2. Let’s multiply them. We got 30. Well, that’s less than 32.

That’s why it gets wild. Here, with our second example, 30<32, but only by a smidge. It’s a little more than 30^1.01.

That abc conjecture says that there are only a finite amount of abcs in which c is larger than the product of the prime factors.

So our little a+b=c is getting a little more confusing. Yes.

Now many people tried to prove it. It’s worth so much if you can prove this. It’s so elementary but also so difficult to prove, because how do we show how finite? How do we show it’s finite when so many infinities exist?

Enter Shinichi Mochizuki [the man who helped me pass abstract algebra with this very proof!]. He is very well known in the community. Maybe because he had something published and had to take it down once due to insufficient proofs. Maybe due to his brilliance. Either way, if you read proofs and research what’s new in the math world, you know him.

He posted a 500 page proof in maybe 2012? Idk. I saw them when they got published in 2021-2022. They held conferences to try to edit and disprove his proof. They held conferences. And they couldn’t. Fucking. Read. It. It was too confusing and referred to hundreds of his past work!

But, as I mentioned, it was published. Between 12-18 mathematicians verified his work. It looks correct—as correct as it can.

But here’s the issue. Only that margin of people could verify it. And that small amount are reportedly in “Mochizuki’s Circle.” Others are still pissed off/don’t believe it was proven because he wrote it so weirdly. It’s a sin to mathematicians. They can’t point to any error because it’s practically incomprehensible.

And you can download all 500 pages online. For free.

I love it.

WiP Wednesday

Thank you to everyone who’s been including me in tag games over the past few weeks! Tagged in Tiny tease/tidbit Tuesday/Wip Wednesday by these talented lovelies: @devirnis @bigfootsmom @heartbeatdiaz @housewifebuck @hippolotamus @wildlife4life @wikiangela @king-buckley @911onabc @rewritetheending @spotsandsocks @try-set-me-on-fire @panbuckley

Since Eddie’s Maths kink won the Poll by a landslide, it’s time to get back into this… Previous snippets here!

So planning a ‘spontaneous’ trip to one of the local casinos this time? Without the ‘wink wink, hush hush’ of keeping details under lock and key from Buck? No longer having to hide his open longing in front of co-workers, captains, and Chiefs? Totally not a means to an end.

No sir, no hidden agenda here.

Except Eddie would be… stretching the truth, just a tiny bit. Playing loose with it, he’d argue.

Getting back into those suits, only this time side-by-side in the dying evening light filtering through Eddie’s bedroom blinds, catching each other's eyes and allowing themselves to watch the other. The stretching of shirts over muscles, the flick of a wrist as ties are looped and buttons done up.

Eddie loves it.

Tagging: @alyxmastershipper @mellaithwen @elvensorceress @spaceprincessem @rogerzsteven @monsterrae1 @thekristen999 @mysteriouslyyounggalaxy @transboybuckley @diazass @useramor @homerforsure @the-likesofus @like-the-rest-of-la @fiona-fififi @honestlydarkprincess @eowon @chaosandwolves @jobairdxx @bekkachaos

Hmm yes I could see that bringing Tommy is a way to secure a solid recurring cast but I don’t know. I promise I’m not trying to be annoying, genuinely, I can’t see why they’d bring Tommy back unless he’s there to serve or be part of a significant storyline. The show already has a core recurring cast like you said - the folks at dispatch, certain police officers, and Ravi for the 118. Do we really need more recurring cast that aren’t there to serve a specific plot/story purpose? And if the argument is they’re doing this for the potential new audience we’ll get with this move to abc, then why bring Tommy back? He’s only a familiar face to us not the new audience. For them, everyone will be a “new face”. Listen, if Tommy was just coming back for the shipwreck arc I wouldn’t think anything of it because 911 loves to bring back old characters for nostalgia reasons. I just feel like this may be beyond nostalgia. When Taylor came back it was for a romantic storyline, likewise for Ana, Marisol. And even when we got new, recurring faces, they were for the purpose of romantic entanglements - take Lena and Lucy. The only reason those didn’t pan out was either a lack of romantic chemistry or audience reaction. The only recurring characters we’ve been introduced to recently that haven’t led to a romantic arc were Ravi and Jonah. Ravi was the one to do the exact thing you suggested - give the 118 someone outside of the five to bounce off of and Jonah was there for a very specific storyline that was being set up as the mystery of the season. My point being, Ravi is already the 118’s recurring, “extra” guy that’s not there for a set reason but just to add depth to the team. They don’t need another firefighter guy coming in and doing the same thing for a few episodes.

ravi is the new kid naive fresh eyes perspective character, he as a recurring character has already been given his role and fils the storylines he needs to fill based on that. so im sure that the role tommy is filling is something that ravi, lucy, etc. cant do because of their established role on the show.

i am NOT saying that tommy will not serve any purpose or be involved in any storyline, all im saying is that the jump to conclusions in saying that his return MUST have to do with bucks romantic adventures is illogical and unbased.

Math is in this very fascinating place where most math research is both completely impenetrable to the layman and lacks any method of empirical verification, and yet it's so rigorously formalized that upon review, the academic community typically comes to a nigh-universal consensus on the correctness of research.

There are exceptions to this - there is a claimed proof of the abc conjecture first presented in 2012 that is widely disputed, and while I think we should consider it refuted, the author hasn't given up on pushing it. But this is, as far as I can tell, pretty rare.

There are also finitist types, but their point of view seems less that mathematicians are wrong in terms of having incorrect proofs and more that axiom sets that allow for infinity are fundamentally wrongheaded. Which is dumb but w/e

Ten Great Essays about Mathematics

What Is Math? by Dan Falk - A teenager asked that age-old question on TikTok, creating a viral backlash, and then, a thoughtful scientific debate…

How Natural is Numeracy? by Philip Ball - Where does our number sense come from? Is it a neural capacity we are born with — or is it a product of our culture?

Infinity Plus One, and Other Surreal Numbers by Polly Shulman - In the whole intellectual history of humankind, says Kruskal, there have been only a handful of genuine totally ordered number systems: the naturals, the integers, the rationals, the cardinals, the ordinals and now the surreals.

Encounter with the Infinite by Robert Schneider - How did a minimally trained, isolated mathematician, with little more than an out-of-date elementary textbook, anticipate some of the deepest theoretical problems of mathematics—including concepts discovered only after his death?

The Mind-Bending Math Behind Spot It! by Linda Rodriguez McRobbie - The simple matching game has some deceptively complex mathematics behind the scenes

A Most Profound Math Problem by Alexander Nazaryan - On August 6, 2010, a computer scientist named Vinay Deolalikar published a paper with a name as concise as it was audacious: “P ≠ NP.”

The Chaos of the Dice by Raffi Khatchadourian - A backgammon hustler’s quest to gain an edge…

Titans of Mathematics Clash Over Epic Proof of ABC Conjecture by Erica Klarreich - Two mathematicians have found what they say is a hole at the heart of a proof that has convulsed the mathematics community for nearly six years…

Your Handy Postcard-sized Guide to Statistics by Tim Harford - The case for everyday practical numeracy has never been more urgent…

The Most Irrational Number by Jordan Ellenberg - The golden ratio is even more astonishing than Dan Brown and Pepsi thought

https://www.quora.com/Where-can-I-find-PDFs-of-Shinichi-Mochizukis-proof-of-the-ABC-conjecture

You can download each part here (and I have a pdf of the response I read last night much to @phillycheesesteakcore detriment )

Yooooooooo this is so cool!

That's so weird because my reaction to S4 finale is it was the moment that convinced me Buddie was going to be endgame. Now two seasons later and we could be heading back to that same ending for the season depending on the events of the finale leaves me doubting things ngl. The only things I'm clinging on to are the couch theory, Eddie saying that relationships with people you meet at a rescue never works, and the fact that we're being introduced to these women so late in the season. It just seems like the writers even know they're giving this the most superficial things so that they can fix what they did in early S7.

To put it bluntly it just sucks that you know if this was gonna be the final 2 episodes that instead of going towards a story they've been telling since S2 they decide to put Buck and Eddie with women we don't even know their last name or anything about them. But they got renewed and will be moving to ABC so they can do the story they wanted to tell and I imagine these women will be kicked to the curb early in S7.

Okay, I'm gonna be real honest with you. I've seen that you've sent asks to a few of my friends, all generally saying the same thing. So to see you send me this ask makes me feel like you don't really want to have a discussion and aren't looking for actual support or positivity, you just want to keep being upset and tell people until someone agrees with you and tells you that your opinion that the writers made a shitty choice etc is valid.

So, to repeat a few things my friends have said:

They have not been doing Buddie since season two. I don't know why people persist on claiming this. Buddie was never the original plan. They did not decide to have Eddie get with Buck in season two. In fact in season two they seemed kinda unsure what to do with Eddie since he wouldn't be with Maddie any longer, but they still wanted the character, and Ryan, on the show. For my money, they started exploring the possibility of Buddie and discussing it seriously in season three, and season four was when they locked that in.

Now, I don't know about you, since you're a stranger on the internet, but to me, as a writer, it is a much, much better choice for them to have taken the risk rather than cram Buddie together, for a few reasons.

One: They cannot walk it back once Buddie is together. You're telling me you wanted them to sacrifice their story's integrity to give us a rushed unsatisfying get-together? Get out of my house. Watching television is, inherently, a gamble because it means you might get your stories unfulfilled. If you can't take that risk, then leave the casino. I am willing to risk it because I want a truly satisfying get-together, not something that was rushed and therefore isn't worthy of the delicious slow burn they're building.

Two: How many times do I have to scream at everyone to consider the behind the scenes issues before people start actually listening to me? Oh, forever? Because everyone is operating in bad faith and nobody wants to actually listen? Good to know. This will be the last I say on the matter.

We do not know what behind the scenes was going on in addition to the cancellation. What if certain Fox executives weren't supportive of Buddie? You're telling me that the writers and cast and crew should have, right when they'll need new jobs, guaranteed that their last employers will talk shit about them for disobeying orders and putting two characters together that they were told not to put together?

This is purely conjecture on my part, but I have seen time after time in fandom certain cast members and certain crew members and certain writers want a ship to become canon, and others not, and I have seen the way that back and forth played out, and guess fucking what? NOBODY WANTS TO LOSE THEIR FUCKING JOB. NOBODY WANTS TO BE PREVENTED FROM HAVING ANOTHER JOB.

Now, again, that's pure conjecture, but Fox really hasn't treated OG well for a while in terms of renewal, marketing, etc. And I have never, EVER, seen a show snapped up by another network so quickly. It's always "we got cancelled!" and then a few days or weeks later it's "we were saved by another network!" ABC was ON it. This gives me hope for a lot of things, like perhaps a 22 episode season. But given Fox's lack of promotion and appreciation for OG, it wouldn't surprise me if the cast and crew wanted Buddie and some people in the network didn't, and that is why we've been delayed on Buddie going canon. And while YOU may cry viva la revolution, it's much easier to have your principles when you've got a belly full, and while it may suck creatively there is no reason to piss off your bosses right when you need them to write you a recommendation for a new job because your show got cancelled - and while I'm sure they were hopeful, given the cast's social media I do not think anyone knew until it was publicly announced that they had, indeed, been saved and gotten another season.

My point is, this is just one theory I'm pulling out of a hat like a rabbit. We do not know what other BTS stuff is going on that made them choose to delay Buddie until season seven.

Three: To go back to point one, I do not think you've seen the reactions when a ship goes canon poorly. I was there, Gandalf. I was there the day that Booth and Bones got together. I was in the trenches. It soured SO many people, including me, on the show. To quote MBMBAM: YOU DIDN'T STICK THE LANDING! YOU JUST FLIPPED IN THE AIR FOR TWENTY MINUTES!!!

Sticking the landing when getting a ship together is possibly the most important moment in the couple's story. You cannot fuck up that landing. The writers chose to take the chance on it never happening in order to stick the landing the way they wanted. If that pisses you off, FINE. But stop coming into our inboxes to say the same thing over and over again about it, because we do not agree and we are never going to agree. We are at an impasse.

Now, to move onto some other points, WHY IS EVERYONE CONVINCED THAT EDDIE WILL STILL BE WITH SOMEONE WHEN THE SEASON ENDS!? WHEN DID WE DECIDE THIS!? He could be! But holy shit he could just go on one date with her that fizzles out! We have no clue! If someone in this fandom can see into the future and knows for sure this is going to happen then give me the winning lotto numbers right this second!!! Give them to me!!!! I need to fund my world domination campaign!!!

And finally, I feel like you've answered your own concerns, here. Given that you have sent similar asks to my friends, I don't think you're actually interested in allaying those concerns, because you keep answering your own questions and repeating yourself ad naseum. I could be wrong. Again, I don't know you. But this sure seems to be the case given that you're saying to me similar stuff you've said to my friends in asks they've already answered.

But to look at your own ask, you just said why we shouldn't be worried. "It seems like the writers even know..." YES. YES, THEY DO KNOW. I would love to know who the hell decided that television shows are made by the Television Fairy who creeps into the studio at night and waves her magic wand to create all the good stuff we see on our screens while the writers sit around with their thumbs up their asses.

Let's imagine you are a showrunner and you are going into the second half of your season, and you learn that it is extremely likely this season is actually your last. You guys start negotiating quietly with other networks to move the show, while hoping against hope this is not, indeed, the end. But this means you now have, what, nine episodes? To put all your characters in a place that is, if not ideal, at least somewhat positive for your audience?

You can't start any too-major arcs. You can't end on too bad of an emotional cliffhanger. This means some things will wrap up faster. Other things will get pushed forward. And some things have to be delayed, because they might never happen, and you can't give people a third or a half of an arc. Which means that you're going to be throwing in some filler for those characters instead, and doing things differently than how you might have wanted.

I do not know how many times I have to explain this, but television is not fanfiction. When I sit down to write a fic, there's not a damn person in the world who can tell me what to do. I write the story that I want, and if someone doesn't like it, they can hit the bricks.

Television is not like that. Television is one of the biggest group projects there is. Picture the worst group project you had to do in school and then times it by ten. Welcome to the television and film industry. The fact that any film or show, even the truly awful ones, gets made is nothing short of a miracle given all the people involved and all the ways the ball can be dropped. As a show runner, you are answering to multiple executives, to the creators, to the executive producers, to your own writers' room, and to the fans. You are trying to balance what everyone tells you to do, what the fans want you to do, and what you and your (hopefully trusted) writing team want and plan to do. I could never be a show runner and while there are quite a few with whom I've got bones to pick, I cannot deny that they all do a job I would never, ever be capable of pulling off. I'd quit on day three.

So, yeah, they gave Buck a temporary girlfriend as filler, to kinda cap off his current arc if this was the end, or to provide more layers to his full arc if they got another season. If you don't like that, then that's okay. Nobody is telling you to like it. When you come into someone's inbox like this, the assumption is that you're looking to be reassured, and so that's why you're getting the responses that you are. The previous people who've answered you have been trying to reassure you and allay the concerns you seem to have.

But it seems to me like you want a more full conversation, and possibly, that you just want to rant and vent. That's fine, but find a friend for that. Join a discord server. Because when you send the same stuff over and over again to different people, all of whom give you basically the same reply, it just makes you look like a very obstinate stick in the mud who wants everyone else to join them in being upset, and people don't much like having the same conversation multiple times, or being pushed into being upset when they're not.

You might just have to agree to disagree, and move on. Find other ways to get this out of your system, because my inbox, and the inboxes of others, is not the place for your venting in circles.

Now, in spite of my firm tone, I hope you will believe me when I say that I hope you're taking care of yourself, and that you are staying safe in this scary world, and that you have a good rest of your day.

ABC conjecture

Why are these always suggested as "win a million dollars" for proving or disproving it? Is it some sort of trick for students?

The conjecture is that there are 3 values that are coprime and satisfy a+b=c

Which... Literally is 1, 2, 3. Or most any low prime number and 2.

Because 2 is the only even prime. The sum of two odds is even, and therefore don't satisfy it. And an even plus an odd makes an odd. So in order for it to be true, a or b must be 2, and the other two must be odd.

1+2=3

2+3=5

2+5=7

When we get to 9 we start to see non-prime odd numbers.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the problem.

The wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, urged two Arizona lawmakers to help reverse President Joe Biden's 2020 electoral victory in the state, according to emails reviewed by ABC News -- suggesting that the conservative activist played a larger role in pushing to overturn the election than was previously publicly known.

Thomas, whose political activism following the 2020 election has faced growing scrutiny given her proximity to the Supreme Court, emailed Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers and Arizona State Rep. Shawnna Bolick in the days following the election in November, asking them to "fight back against fraud" and "do your Constitutional duty!" according to records.

The emails were obtained by ABC News on Friday through a records request to the Arizona House of Representatives. Their contents were first reported by The Washington Post.

"Please stand strong in the face of political and media pressure," Thomas wrote in separate emails to the two GOP lawmakers on Nov. 9, 2020. "Please reflect on the awesome authority granted to you by our constitution. And then please take action to ensure that a clean slate of electors is chosen for our state."

In another pair of emails to Bowers and Bolick, sent days later on Nov. 13, Thomas wrote, "As state lawmakers, you have the Constitutional power and authority to protect the integrity of our elections -- and we need you to exercise that power now!"

"Never before in our nation's history have our elections been so threatened by fraud and unconstitutional procedures," Thomas added, according to the emails.

Bolick, according to records reviewed by ABC News, replied to Thomas on Nov. 10, 2020, saying, "I hope you and Clarence are doing great!" and providing instructions on how to file a complaint for those who "experience voter fraud."

Bolick on Friday took to Twitter to fire back at news coverage of Thomas' emails.

"The dishonest media wants to distract attention from election fraud & our efforts to secure elections," she wrote. "Let's cut through the conjecture & put this to bed. Here is the public records request from Washington Post & my emails, which show me responding as I would to any constituent."

The emails reviewed by ABC News do not show any response from Bowers.

Reached by ABC News Friday, a spokesperson for Bowers, Andrew Wilder, said in a statement, "The emails appear to have been among the hundreds of thousands of messages sent to the Speaker's office during that period. Speaker Bowers did not see, much less read, the vast majority of those messages, including the form email sent by Mrs. Thomas."

Although a self-described Trump supporter, Bowers said following the election that he had seen no evidence of voter fraud. For his actions to protect election integrity in Arizona, Bowers this Sunday will receive the 2022 John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, presented by the Kennedy Presidential Library Foundation, alongside four other recipients that include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Neither Thomas nor her attorney responded to a request for comment from ABC News.

I think people have forgotten that they are actors who impersonate characters whose story is not in their hands. Oliver and Ryan are NOT Buck and Eddie and I don't think they have much say in the story that will be told. I don't even think they know how the season will end yet and they certainly don't know what will happen in season 8, so picking on them seems very immature to me. the nice thing is being able to have fun with conjectures, but when it gets as heavy as it has been happening lately you should take a step back and wait. only time will tell what will happen. or just Tim.... 🤭🤭🤭

Yep. Tim and I’m guessing the ABC higher ups know. I’m super psyched to find out what actually happens not just seeing the promos.

“Wow! What is that, man?” vs “That is fast” : how the Wikipedia GOFAST video misquotes the pilots and changes the interpretation of the incident.

There is a serious problem with the GOFAST video on the Wikipedia page currently titled ‘Pentagon UFO videos’.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos

**The Wikipedia GOFAST video misquotes the pilots. The transcript has the pilots saying “That is fast”, when very clearly the pilots are saying “Wow! What is that, man?”, and this changes the way people interpret the video.**

Compare the statements for yourself –

*At 1m51 TTSA GOFAST video* – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxVRg7LLaQA&t=1m19s

*At 29s Wikipedia GOFAST video* – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Go_Fast_Official_USG_Footage_of_UAP_for_Public_Release.webm

In the past I had linked a few times to that Wikipedia GOFAST video until I realised the transcript was incorrect. And not just incorrect, but the transcript makes the pilots look like they don’t understand parallax or their instrumentation. **That transcript changes the meaning of the statement the pilot makes from one where the pilot exclaims he doesn’t understand what the object is, “What is that, man”, to a statement which allows people to claim the pilots don’t understand parallax “That is fast”.** Why is that important? Because it changes the interpretation of the video from one which purports to show something that can not be identified and possibly anomalous, to one which suggests the pilots don’t understand what they are doing.That one misquote, “That is fast”, changes the way people interpret the video.

So, this has long annoyed me. There are so many stupid statements about the GOFAST video. It is the most misunderstood of the three Navy videos.

— There are articles like this ABC News America article which actually says [*”In the ‘Go Fast’ video Navy pilots are heard exclaiming how fast an object is moving above the water.”*](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ufo-report-week-incidents-unexplained/story?id=92303931)

— There is trigonometry lesson after trigonometry lesson indicating the speed of the object to be about 40mph, [like this one,](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOFv7zF9JAA&t=9959s) which is the most played section of this video from the NASA briefing, 31 May 2023, and where the scientist says *”So it’s not our task to conjecture what this object is”.*

— Then there are the duck interpretations which I won’t link to.To suggest the pilots did not understand parallax is ridiculous. They clearly knew the speed of the object, and the altitude – the pilots can read their instrumentation. Yet, despite what appears to be the mundane speed of the object, and knowing its altitude, the pilots are surprised. Why?

First, they could not get a lock on the object. Those first few seconds of the video where the object is unable to be locked on to by the targeting system indicate something strange about the object. It should have been easy to lock onto something moving at 40mph ahead of the jet, yet it takes about four attempts. If it is a balloon, or a duck, it has stealth ability!

Second, the pilots express that they can’t work out what the object is. “What the f@#k is that thing?” & “Wow! What is that, man?” Why wouldn’t the pilots have simply assumed it was a balloon, or a duck? Why would the object in GOFAST be considered anomalous, so that to this day it remains on AARO’s front page because nobody at the Pentagon during the exactly 8 years since it was filmed has been able to explain it?*It is because of the GOFAST film’s context – ALWAYS THE CONTEXT!* And there is virtually no context at all on that Wikipedia page to help anyone understand those videos.

GOFAST was filmed as part of the same events as GIMBAL.

There is nowhere on the current [‘Pentagon UFO videos’](https://web.archive.org/web/20240615000000*/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos) Wikipedia page that reports [that the GOFAST video and the GIMBAL video were filmed the same day, 21 January, 2015](https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/u-s-navy-releases-dates-of-three-officially-acknowledged-encounters-with-phenomena/) (I may be wrong about this, but I have checked several times and can’t see the date mentioned there [& note, [there is still some conjecture about that date](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsbMIm9QtEA&t=5m52s)]). Clearly that is a serious omission, because GOFAST and GIMBAL being the same day would suggest these videos might be of the same events, and people have speculated the films were made [only minutes apart.](https://twitter.com/ScottishDebunk1/status/1664050880063102977) Being a continuous series of events makes the videos more problematic, because it suggests that the object in GOFAST could be related to several other objects [Ryan Graves has regularly said were filmed flying in formation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhUwuaxiiQU&t=19m5s) in the longer GIMBAL video, but which we now don’t see in the shorter GIMBAL film. If GOFAST is one of those objects, it gives more validity to the suggestion that GOFAST is not just a balloon, or a duck, because it is less likely the pilots could make the mistake of seeing fairly obvious things twice, or over a long period of time, but not identify them.But, it wasn’t always like that.

The ‘Pentagon UFO videos’ page was preceded by another page. There was once the ‘USS Theodore Roosevelt UFO incidents’ page.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Theodore_Roosevelt_UFO_incidents

That page was last added to archive.org [in April 2020](https://web.archive.org/web/20200429165253/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Theodore_Roosevelt_UFO_incidents) (there was a discussion on Wikipedia in May 2020 to merge the two pages, and [that discussion might be of interest to some people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:USS_Theodore_Roosevelt_UFO_incidents#Combine_and_rewrite_to_avoid_fringe)). Just note that the ‘USS Theodore Roosevelt UFO incidents’ page actually discusses the circumstances of the videos, and gives information from pilots like Graves and Accoin surrounding the filming of GIMBAL and GOFAST – the current ‘Pentagon UFO videos’ page does not include any of that valuable context. The ‘USS Theodore Roosevelt UFO incidents’ page links to the NYT December 2017 article ‘Glowing auras’, while the current incarnation of its successor doesn’t. *And the GOFAST video there does not have the misleading transcript.*I have some views on when the misleading transcript for GOFAST got onto Wikipedia, but I’m not 100% sure, and it hardly matters. What matters is that the GOFAST video transcript is clearly wrong. The pilot clearly says “Wow! What is that, man?”, and the transcript there incorrect says “That is fast”. This changes the meaning from indicating the pilots could not identify the object, to suggesting the pilots could not interpret their own instrumentation. Even if it is just an honest mistake, it is misleading and needs to be corrected or removed from Wikipedia.

Remember when I read that five hundred page proof last year? Remember how I couldn't shut up about Mochizuki for a solid month because I was enamored with his dedication to the subject of the ABC conjecture and how incomprehensible his proof was? How controversial that proof was? Remember how I wrote a mathematics-based love poem purely so I could compare my emotions to that proof?

The feminine urge to reread that proof is so fucking strong oh my god I'm considering spending the next few weeks pouring over it on the bus I--

hello abbi!!! tell me more about 'The math kink conjecture 5+1' <3333

Gonna add @devirnis into this also after asking about the same WIP! I haven’t been able to add anything recently so no snippet unfortunately, sorry!

So! This lil fic originally started off as my attempt at a quick 6x13 fic before the episode aired (after the photo leak) about Buck and Eddie hooking up at the casino.

After the episode aired and we got buck with his ‘superpowers’ I wanted a 5+1 of Eddie getting hot and bothered by Bucks sexy maths talk and mixing it with firefighter work such as Buck knowing exactly how much rope for a call, which translates to exactly how much rope to tie himself up with….

It also helps my boyfriend is doing his PhD in Maths/Engineering so he can help me be accurate with the terminology AND have a good laugh with me writing this!

I owe this fic to @eddiebabygirldiaz and @hippolotamus - may I one day finish it for them 🫡

Scientific American: $1 Million Will Go to the Mathematician Who Busts the ‘ABC Conjecture’ Theory

Do you believe Shinichi Mochizuki's proof of the abc conjecture is correct?

no