1. It's a thinking wall, so use it to post any:

• Existential questions

• Insane ideas

• Questions for Possum

2. Use the comment function to respond to posts.

3. Political subjects are allowed and encouraged but with respectful interactions!

4. Forbidden: hate-speech, NSFW content, shitposting/spam, self-promotion.

During the testing phase Possum will manually approve the posts.

We're all taught not to do it. By our parents, by the education system, but mostly by experiences where it usually catches up to us and cause more trouble than the truth likely would have.

I think most would agree that usually the truth is actually better. It's just that, almost in a procrastinistic fashion, we tend to not want to face the potential - or even likely - conflict that comes with the truth immediately. We'll put it off until it bites our behinds.

BUT! I think there still exist circumstances in which lying IS permissable or even encouraged. This leads me to believe there is a spectrum of "You can/should lie about this", with the contrary statement on the other side of the spectrum (you know how spectrums work).

Where "acts of dishonesty" are placed on this spectrum is subjective. However, on either extremes of this spectrum I believe most people will find common ground. This means that there are lies most of us believe to be acceptable or encouraged.

In this post, I'm not necessarily looking for examples to be placed on the spectrum, although that is also welcome.

What it is I'm aiming for is to define the items that go on the "You can/should lie"-side of the spectrum.

What properties do those lies have? What boxes should be ticked for you to consider a lie permissable, encouraged or even obligated? As a Santa Claus substitute, when would a lying person not be put on your naughty list?

Cold soup exists. Sweet soup exists.

Possum out

Can it even have a "start" than and why is it not thursday?

What would happen?

But what I wanted to say is that the number i is just as real in that sense as its so called "real" siblings. The distinction between real and imaginary is misplaced since the imaginary numbers are note merely imaginary but also in our perception of reality and their discovery which was disregarded for a long time and shows that the imaginary numbers intersect with the real numbers R and that we can even combine them. These combinations of the 2 number systems are called complex numbers C and can produce other interesting and beautiful structures in functions but sadly for our minds unfathomable, that is also the main reason why they are disregarded despise experimental proof that our reality harbours these numbers.

Also this was a problem fro negative numbers since it was said that they also don't exist for centuries before most accepted them.

But now to what I thought about after this, I got the question of how do people think about when they find out about numbers which intersect the commonly taught number line and extend them in more dimensions than 1 since they are never taught in school. How would one fathom a 2 dimensional number especially for functions, at least try to fathom on them since how I already said in my previous ramblings that they are not so simple since they create a 4 dimensional object, and even worse how would one try to understand 4 dimensional numbers (they exist and are called quaternions, they are not really used much in most cases since they have uncompleted algebra expressions unlike the complex numbers)?

So to be more clear since I tend to ramble:

How would who ever bothers to read this understand multi dimensional numbers?

What questions would the great philosophers have us ask to understand the nature of an atom or, even harder still, the nature of the soul?