Space.

ghettoinuyasha:

chinaglaze:
charlesoberonn:
“Explain Freud’s structural model of the psyche”
FUCK
this really is the best one

(via dontbeanassbutt)

Aug 27

felweed:

WHO COULD FORGET????

(Source: bzfd.it, via joghurtbrot)

Aug 12

(Source: stability, via dontbeanassbutt)

Aug 11

rj4gui4r:

Tell me about it

(Source: audreyisfab, via damnitrj)

Jun 4

homeisaplaceinthehills:

Quarry
—
Atarfe, 2007

(via zzkt)

May 12

lolzman87:

Bill Wurtz, the guy who made History of Japan, just made a sequel. Watch it.

(via captainsbones-deactivated201811)

May 11

spaceexp:

The view from the Opportunity rover on the western edge of Endeavour Crater on April 3, 2017

via reddit

Apr 9

dailybadjokes:

What’s the difference between a good joke and
a bad joke timing

(Source: daily-bad-jokes, via dontbeanassbutt)

Apr 1

(Source: pleatedjeans, via gear12turbo)

Mar 20

somenerv:

HARD HADOU

(via damnitrj)

Mar 18

(Source: twitter.com, via damnitrj)

Mar 12

preposterousness:

earthmedicina:
be so completely yourself that everyone else feels safe to be themselves too
i can’t think of much that i aspire to more than this

(Source: formlessnow, via dontbeanassbutt)

Mar 12

rudygodinez:

Prof. Dr, Max Bruckner, Four Plates from the Book “Vielecke und Vielflache”, (1900)
Regular convex polyhedra, frequently referenced as “Platonic” solids, are featured prominently in the philosophy of Plato, who spoke about them, rather intuitively, in association to the four classical elements (earth, wind, fire, water… plus ether). However, it was Euclid who actually provided a mathematical description of each solid and found the ratio of the diameter of the circumscribed sphere to the length of the edge and argued that there are no further convex polyhedra than those 5: tetrahedron, hexahedron (also known as the cube), octahedron, dodecahedron and icosahedron.

(via damnitrj)

Mar 12

The concepts ‘system’, ‘apparatus’, ‘environment’, immediately imply an artificial division of the world, and an intention to neglect, or take only schematic account of, the interaction across the split. The notions of ‘microscopic’ and 'macroscopic’ defy precise definition. So also do the notions of 'reversible’ and 'irreversible’. Einstein said that it is theory which decides what is 'observable’. I think he was right - 'observation’ is a complicated and theory-laden business. Then that notion should not appear in the formulation of fundamental theory. Information? Whose information? Information about what? On this list of bad words from good books, the worst of all is 'measurement’. It must have a section to itself.

John Stewart Bell
(via inthenoosphere)

(Source: inthenoosphere, via zzkt)

Mar 12

firelorcl:

dermatologists HATE me. everyone hates me. i’m so alone

(via dontbeanassbutt)

Mar 12