Profile

Cover photo
Albert Ripple (The 45th Degree)
Worked at Myself
Attended The Bronx High School of Science
Lives in Brooklyn
573 followers|1,865,516 views
AboutPostsCollectionsPhotosYouTube

Stream

 
10000 BCE, Paleolithic Ukraine:   First known use of the Swastika
The Swastika began as a symbol of good luck, from ancient sanskrit "svastika": "thing [ka] which is [asti] good [su]"
December 25th 1907, Austria:   Order of the New Templars are the first to associate the Swastika with Aryanism
1920:   The Nazis adopt the Swastika as their emblem
Wikipedia's "Swastika" page was the main source of the above info, supported by several more-reputable sources.
The Nazis entered WW2 on September 1st 1939 and surrendered on May 7th 1945.

So for about 12000 years, the Swastika was a symbol of Good,
and for about the past 100 years, of which only 25 were active, it was a symbol of something Evil.
Should 38 years of corruption be allowed to overthrow something that for around 315 times longer was something holy?
No.
It's time the horrific blip was eliminated from this human symbol's meaning.
We have the power to prevent the Swastika from becoming another victim of the Holocaust.
So let's reproliferate this symbol of good will that predates written language itself.
1
Albert Ripple (The 45th Degree)'s profile photoKarl Schuch's profile photo
5 comments
 
+Albert Ripple
ok, well of course, I can only report what I witnessed.
     The first time I saw a swastika was outside  temple in Mumbai, although I never entered it.    sometime later I was in New Delhi and I was taken on a tour of the city which included several temples of different sects.
Upon entering a Sikh temple decorated with swastikas and adorned with statues etc, I came across an inscription in a glass case where there was a description of the special Aryan nature of Sikhs - although I would be hard pressed to recall it verbatim - It was about 5 years ago.
 
Anyway, here’s about all I could find on the net:
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101127034754AA7JOGN
Best Answer:   The Siks are a North Indian ethnic group, they are NOT related to the dark skinned Dravidians of south and central India, the Siks are descendats of the ARYans, a fair skinned race that came from Mount ARARat
Add a comment...
 
Perfect!!  And may I say, great comic timing ;) !
1
Anni Mae (Ezzi)'s profile photo
 
That was nerdy even by my standards. :P
Add a comment...
 
i will preface the following thesis with the following statement: i take things to[o] seriously XP :

as is my usual response to things, i decided to bother looking up what conservatism is. google's autoresponse to "what is conservatism in politics", from philosophybasics.com in this case, is:
Conservatism (or conservativism) is any political philosophy that favours tradition (in the sense of various religious, cultural, or nationally-defined beliefs and customs) in the face of external forces for change, and is critical of proposals for radical social change.
, which actually isn't so bad, and is in fact a bit necessary: for example, liberals, whom we usually consider to be counter to conservatism, are actually themselves conservatives when it comes to privacy -- unless we allow invasive policies to continue for the next 20 years, for then, while keeping the same attitudes towards privacy, liberals will no longer be conservatives, since by then, lacking privacy will have become traditional. this idea of the variability of conservatism because of the variability of traditions is further explored in the opening paragraph of conservatism's wikipedia entry:
Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others, called reactionaries, oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were".[1][2] The first established use of the term in a political context originated with François-René de Chateaubriand in 1818,[3] during the period of Bourbon restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution. The term, historically associated with right-wing politics, has since been used to describe a wide range of views. There is no single set of policies that are universally regarded as conservative, because the meaning of conservatism depends on what is considered traditional in a given place and time. Thus conservatives from different parts of the world—each upholding their respective traditions—may disagree on a wide range of issues. Edmund Burke, an 18th-century politician who opposed the French Revolution but supported the American Revolution, is credited as one of the main theorists of conservatism in Great Britain in the 1790s.[4] According to Quintin Hogg, the chairman of the British Conservative Party in 1959, "Conservatism is not so much a philosophy as an attitude, a constant force, performing a timeless function in the development of a free society, and corresponding to a deep and permanent requirement of human nature itself."[5]
. so, conservatism is only as bad or good as whatever traditions are currently or were recently in place. since conservatism is about not changing and liberalism is often seen as being counter to conservatism, this might lead one to believe that liberalism is purely about change, but apparently, no. here is the first paragraph of liberalism's wiki entry, the first two sentences of which are google's autoresponse to "what is liberalism in politics":
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1][2] The former principle is stressed in classical liberalism while the latter is more evident in social liberalism.[3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programs such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, and international cooperation.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10]
, so liberalism is about preserving, protecting, and acquiring rights, and it seems as tho the only way this could go wrong is 1) when people have faulty understandings of rights -- such as the idea of freedom of religion meaning that the leaders of corporate entities have a right to impose their beliefs on their employees or customers or the wouldbe of either --, 2) when people try to take their rights in an improper manner -- such as with the horrible violence and persecution in the French Revolution or in modern riots -- or 3) when people mistake things they want for rights -- such as mistaking non-merit-based promotion of minorities for enforcement of equality when it is in fact the opposite -- (btw the confusion over the word "entitlement" is that it is applied equally to both rights and non-right wants).
as wikipedia mentioned the link between conservatism and right-wing politics and provided a link for the latter, and since i look things up even if -- especially if -- i have a gist of an understanding of what something is, i followed the link, and here's the first paragraph:
Right-wing politics are political positions or activities that view some forms of social stratification or social inequality as either inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,[1][2][3] typically defending this position on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition.[4][5][6][7][8][9] Hierarchy and inequality may be viewed as natural results of traditional social differences[10] and/or from competition in market economies.[11][12]
. now we know from real-world communism that total equality doesn't work, because 1) even when the system they live under is meant to counter it, people still want to raise themselves above others and control others, and it'll still be that some will succeed in doing either/both, and 2) if people know they'll get what they want and need no matter what, they'll only do work they want to do (and there is work no one wants), and if what they get is contingent on whether they do the work they're given without regard to how well they do it, they'll do it the way they want to (usually lazily if they don't like the work), and if what's given to people is based on how much they produce and not the quality of their products, they'll just produce a ton of crappy things (usually).
However, it has been shown that, as long as there is some economic inequality, large economic equality is still majorly beneficial. And, though the end of this sentence is admittedly a matter of opinion: obviously any other inequality (discrimination based on race, gender, sexuality, irrelevant disability, irrelevant criminal history, etc.) is ridiculous.
so. if -- and it seems to be the case -- liberalism and right-wing politics are opposites, what is the opposite of conservatism?, and what is left-wing politics? on a Party politics sidebar on the page for right-wing politics, wikipedia links to a left-wing politics page, whose opening paragraph is thus:
Left-wing politics are political positions or activities that accept or support social equality, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality.[1][2][3][4] They typically involve concern for those in society who are perceived as disadvantaged relative to others and a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished.[3]
, so while wikipedia does warn that "The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject." (none of the other articles i've mentioned up to this point have had warnings), we can at least agree that by this definition, liberalism and left-wing politics are synonymous. well, not quite. both "wing"s of politics only concern equality whereas liberalism also concerns liberty, and left-wing politics adds a belief that there definitely is unjustified inequality. this latter addition isn't enough to make right-wing politics not the opposite of left-wing politics, but the point is that as they only counter or support a portion of what liberalism is, neither can be said to be synonymous with or opposite to the whole of liberalism.
so once again, what is the opposites of conservatism and liberalism? my guess for the opposite of conservatism, that is, the name for purely wanting change in a political context, was radicalism. in response to "what is radicalism in politics", google autogives the first sentence of wiki's article on Political radicalism, the first paragraph being:
The term political radicalism (or simply, in political science, radicalism) denotes political principles focused on altering social structures through revolutionary means and changing value systems in fundamental ways. Derived from the Latin radix (root), the denotation of radical has changed since its eighteenth-century coinage to comprehend the entire political spectrum—yet retains the “change at the root” connotation fundamental to revolutionary societal change. Historically, radicalism has referred exclusively to the "radical left", under the single category of far-left politics, rarely incorporating far-right politics though these may have revolutionary elements; the prominent exception is in the United States where some consider radicalism to include both political extremes of the radical left and the "radical right". In traditional labels of the spectrum of political thought, the opposite of radical on the "right" of the political spectrum is termed reactionary.
. so, i was right: radicalism/reactionaryism, a political philosophy focused on changing social systems, is the opposite of conservatism, a political philosophy focused on preserving social systems. so: opposite of liberalism? well i couldn't find such a word. in my search for one i looked up several related words, some of which are listed below.
here is the first entry of google's autodefinitions for:
liberty: the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
, and:
equality: the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities.
. and here is the first paragraph of the wikientry on totalitarianism:
it is a political system in which the state holds total control over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life wherever possible.[1]
so like how right-wing politics is against equality, totalitarianism is against liberty, but neither is against all of liberalism, although totalitarianism is often accompanied by right-wing politics. regarding the latter, though: of all the words that i found containing both elements in their definition -- that is, all the words that were fully-anti-liberal --, they always had something else attached: for example fascism, whose main additional element is a support for nationalism; and so i never found a word that was truly just the full opposite of liberalism.
so to summarize: conservatism is the opposition to change, radicalism is the support of change, liberty is a lack of oppressive invasive restrictions by authorities, equality is the equal treatment of people, liberalism is the support of both liberty and equality, left-wing politics is the support of equality with the belief that there exists inequality, right-wing politics is the opposition to equality, and totalitarianism is the opposition to liberty.
i hope for the day when i can be fully both liberal and conservative and be of neither wing, that is, the day when full equality and liberty has existed for a decent duration. well, a smidgen of economic inequality while long humans still need to work ;) .
3
Add a comment...
 
"Rold Gold's braided Honey Wheat pretzels are saltysweet in a way that is not saltysweet."
                --  Albert Ripple / Degree45; 8/13/15
1
Add a comment...
 
face: "hi, who are you?"
palm: "i'm palm. and you are?"
face: "face."
palm: "well, nice to meet you."
face: "same here."
_
2
Vedanth Bhatnagar's profile photoAlbert Ripple (The 45th Degree)'s profile photoTheHungryVeggie weab (Jo)'s profile photo
4 comments
 
And a ship was born.
Add a comment...

Albert Ripple (The 45th Degree)

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Superman's powers may be stronger, but so are his weaknesses, one of which is magic, to which he is incredibly pervious (ex: one time he just barely touched Wonder Woman's sword and it instantly cut him). So if a normal person can be electrocuted by lightning, Superman would OD on 1 magical lightning bolt. All Thor has to do is make sure he makes the first blow, which, as we see in this video, is what would happen, since Superman would not immediately turn to violence.
1
Add a comment...
 
Thousands of years from now, Unglizh classes in the Yunitud Murikan Ztaitz will force generations of students to read The Frankfurtale, about the Grecian siege on the Eurozone economy, culminating in the Euro Horse, an enormous wooden horse presented as an apology gift to the European Union, which was actually hiding inside it its own wifi and computers programmed to hack the ECB to shreds and transfer all wealth to the business leaders of the Hellenic Republic. But they'll spend even more time teaching about the story of how one of the more prominent programs, Maltransiter, makes its way back to its homedrive after facing 10 excruciating hours fighting off various monstrous rogues and losing all its subprograms, a story which will be called The Maltranssey.

Yes, I put entirely too much research into one joke XD.
4
Vedanth Bhatnagar's profile photo
 
LOL.
Trojan Horses....
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
573 people
Donni ARTistLIFE's profile photo
Dairen Wilcox's profile photo
UNIFIED THEORY CHAYKIN (электромагнитное поле и гравитационное поле)'s profile photo
Mary Ann  Piamonte's profile photo
Munnaswamy P's profile photo
Veer Rana's profile photo
Babaseyi Osinowo's profile photo
sanjay bhatt's profile photo
muhaned Zaman's profile photo
 
What do you think: Should I dye my hair red?
1
Tom Leeds's profile photoLord Satan's profile photoTheHungryVeggie weab (Jo)'s profile photo
16 comments
 
Dye Nate's face onto your head.
Add a comment...
 
<blam.>
2
Lord Satan's profile photoTheHungryVeggie weab (Jo)'s profile photo
2 comments
 
He deserved it though, he called that laser a word that only lasers are allowed to use.
Add a comment...
 
Perfect PArent :P
2
Albert Ripple (The 45th Degree)'s profile photo
 
<laphig zo muj XD>
Add a comment...
 
I herefore nameth this pictor "dictionERRy".
:P
7
Scott M.'s profile photoVedanth Bhatnagar's profile photoEl Único Y Verdadero Mazuera's profile photo
3 comments
 
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
nice one Al 👌
Add a comment...
 
Damn, just a few days after I started I was already trailing off, and soon eventually just stopped again. So, it's time for me to get back to this:
 
I'm finally going through the profiles of all the people who've circled me to see who to circle. So some people may soon get such a notice.
1 comment on original post
1
Albert Ripple (The 45th Degree)'s profile photo
2 comments
 
time for a new round [at some point]
Add a comment...
Albert's Collections
People
Have him in circles
573 people
Donni ARTistLIFE's profile photo
Dairen Wilcox's profile photo
UNIFIED THEORY CHAYKIN (электромагнитное поле и гравитационное поле)'s profile photo
Mary Ann  Piamonte's profile photo
Munnaswamy P's profile photo
Veer Rana's profile photo
Babaseyi Osinowo's profile photo
sanjay bhatt's profile photo
muhaned Zaman's profile photo
Work
Skills
ability to conceptually understand abstract physics and communicate that understanding
Employment
  • Myself
    Physical Theory Nonprofessional, 2011 - 2014
    thought about physics, constructed physical theories, discussed theories
Places
Map of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has lived
Currently
Brooklyn
Story
Tagline
Retired KnowledgeSeeker
Introduction
        I'd joined G+ to discuss with professional physicists the theories I'd made after watching DVD courses. As a result, I've made wonderful friends here from all fields of interest.
        As being in a demanding high school has melted my brain, I'm taking a gapyear before college to chill and re-intellectualize.
Bragging rights
I made the Approximation Interpretation of Quantum Physics, and I made Dark Entropy Theory.
Education
  • The Bronx High School of Science
    2011 - 2015
    Multivariable Calculus & Partial Differential Equations -- AP(Advanced Placement) Calculus BC -- AP Computer Science A (Java Code) -- AP Physics C
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Looking for
Friends
Birthday
April 10, 1997
Relationship
Single
Other names
Former Name: Steven Gregory Heary-Puleo