ILIs and jokes which dont make sense to anyone but themselves

[crazedrat]

Is there a connection? You decide

[717495]

I wish threads about ILIs would stop being so relevant these days.

My option is both A and B, depending.

[crazedrat]

ah.. I chose B.

[717495]

I think B is more commonly perceived, as a joke. A is more personal, and usually perceived through the self, such as laughing at instances in one's head that no one else would understand: which actually ties back to B, because if they told it as a joke, it would not be funny. Not a very bright humor, these caped wolves.

An example I can think of is one laughing at oneself walking in a snow storm. Or eating an oatmeal cookie that dries the throat.

I also think this sort of humor is tied to other Gammas.

[DirectorAbbie]

A or C, depending.

[jughead]

The best ILI jokes are not jokes. 75% B. Split the rest between A and C.
Someone post an ILI comedian if they know of one.

[may]

popular ILI : P

[Clarke]

popular ILI : P

Here's a potential problem. Considering photons seem to act oddly intelligently (photons move differently in a split light experiment depending on where they're being observed), how do we know that the light is actually moving when it's being shined from the car? What if it simply appears?

I don't think that this theory works due to our knowledge of space and the apparent speed of light. We seem to be looking at things back in time.

I generally don't know if this theory has been disproven.

Edit: Basically imagine the following situation. Something exists between point A and point B, and there's particles or something that can be activated in between. When something's triggered, the particles activate, and simultaneously a beam of light forms.

This idea was inspired by a video game weapon I think.

This post has been generally edited. I removed something that said that the theory was supported because light behaves like a wave and a particle. I wasn't understanding the definitions of wave and particle correctly. I think the implications of that theory are that a photon travels as a particle, which behaves like a wave. It travels forward/outward, like a pond ripple. I thought of it more as the wave would spontaneously appear for some reason.

Edit 2: Wait a second. Electrons exist in a cloud around an atom's nucleus. We don't know the exact location of an electron at any given time.

Edit 3: This idea is actually impossible. We have evidence that it takes 5-20 minutes for a radio signal to reach mars. Radio signals are light.

Edit 4: At this point, my idea generation is being kind of an enemy of science. The thought I had was "what if the time at which the beam forms depends on the distance between point A and point B?".

I mean it's an interesting thought, but I don't really know how you would prove that light moves instead of spontaneously forming as a beam between point A and B at a delayed time.

I think that if my idea has any support, it would be related to that split light experiment. That shows that the behavior of light is dependent on an observer. Due to my chronic laziness, I haven't really looked into it further.

Edit 5: So the implications of the idea in Edit 4 are that point A and point B exist, and then afterwards, there's a delay in the formation of the light. By the time the light formed, point A and B have already changed. They no longer exist as an entity that can create the beam. A continuous stream of information (like the observation of the galaxy) would have the following sequence:
-Point A and point B exist 10 light years away from each other.
-Point A and point B trigger the creation of beam C.
-Point A and point B become point A2 and point B2 after 1 second.
-Point A and point B trigger the creation of beam C2.
-Roughly 10 years later, beam C forms.
-1 second after beam C forms, beam C2 forms.

If this process is repeated, it should create a video feed for the observer that seems to be taking place 10 years in the past. This is what we seem to observe.

Edit 6: I think I might have misunderstood the phenomenon behind the double slit experiment, which is what I meant with the split light experiment, so it should no longer be support for the idea that I proposed.

Here are the phenomenons I know of that would need to be considered for this theory to work:
-Why can we see the night sky instantaneously?
-Why does laser light disappear from a wall when cardboard is placed between the laser pointer and the wall?

It's clear that if light functions this way, humans or human-related activities aren't what creates the second point of the beam.

I've thought of the following model for light based on the information above and the theory I proposed:
-There are activated particles, probably some kind of non standard particle, between point A and B.
-Their activation is dependent on point A (the source of light). When point A is blocked, they deactivate a certain period after point A becomes blocked.
-The particles either deactivate simultaneously when disconnected from point A, or they deactivate randomly.

This means that this theory could be tested with the following experiment:
-Turn on a laser pointer (point A) at a wall (point B). Have a method to measure the presence of photons in between.
-Put a sheet of cardboard (object D) between point A and point B.
-Measure the presence of photons between object D and point B. Theoretically, if light traveled from point A to point B, photons would stop being present near object D, and then the lack of protons would slowly expand to point B. If light followed the model that I proposed, photons would stop being present at all points simultaneously, or would disappear randomly along the area from object D to point B.

There's this other thought that the connections between the particles between the two points and point A could also be delayed by distance. In this case, the particles would cause the apparent photons to behave like traveling photons. I think that generally, the model is a poor explanation for that experimental result (it seems to be too meaninglessly complex).

Generally, I think that this theory isn't likely.

[Nephilthoth]

Being ILI is the ultimate joke.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

ILI comedians seem rather common, ILIs are pretty good at telling jokes- it's kind of ironic, they hate the gay thing where ppl are forced/encouraged to laugh in public, like that very typical Fe sitcommy atmosphere, but that's exactly what happens anyway and what they attract when they try to speak... becuz it's their polr. Yeah it tends to be biting and cynical. ILIs often can say something really mean and cruel ((whether it's a joke or not)) but also it has this 'now fuck me even harder and say something even meaner than I did in return' vibe because of their "victim" energy.

[Averroes]

[godslave]

I think that guy might have been a disciple of this one :

 

[Clarke]

Ah, I misread the poll results and voted that I understand ILI jokes to be contrarian. I should've voted that I don't understand my own jokes.

[The Reality Denialist]

Oh... yeah. They have obscure have inner references based on their vast data collection sometimes.

[End]

Here's a statement/joke I told in response to someone reciting "Humpty Dumpty":

"The king's men pushed him off the wall and none of them actually wanted to put him back together again and so they didn't! That's how the PTB works folks."

A coworker I suspect is an EII laughed and said: "Truth" and (after a further discussion among other coworkers) ask how I was wrong about that. I wonder if this how it feels to be a benefactor. They get what you want on a primal level yet do so in such a way that it leaves you a bit lost.

I don't mind that the average EII likes me so much. I get confused when they really overvalue my opinion...

I mean, I just don't actually get why they like me so damn much. I'll say this from a context I'll now admit to. I'm Catholic. The EII in question is/was a freemason. I did not hide this from him and he was certainly not stupid or foolish enough to not innately understand how that was fundamentally a bad thing in regards to our mutual relationship.

He somehow didn't care! Literal card-carrying Freemason vs. Loud and Proud Catholic and yet we got along!

[Clarke]

I'm so socially unaware that I can't even think of the right joke to make.