DISCLAIMER: this article was NOT written by doctors. Therefore, everything reported therein IS NOT A MEDICAL COUNCIL. However, these are data verified by various public sources.
The attack mechanism of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been analyzed, and it mainly consists in exploiting defects of the immune system, in particular the low levels of ImmunoGlobulin A and high levels of INTERLEUCHINA-6 and in general an insufficient level of B lymphocytes and T and dopamine (neuro transmitter). Coronavirus disease was also considered to cause the lowering of alpha and beta interferons. For these reasons, it is useful, to treat the disease, to restore the functions of the immune system to medium effective levels, instead of bombarding experimental drugs, which, with their serious side effects, cause serious damage to patients and in too many cases they reveal themselves ineffective. On the other hand, without a double-blind test on these drugs, it appears difficult to determine whether a patient's recovery can be attributed to the drug or to the natural reaction of the immune system.
These days the world is grappling with the problem of the Covid-19 pandemic, but I am noticing an uncontrolled increase in another problem: the decidedly false news.
Someone came up with the idea of linking this pandemic with the antenna installations for the 5G network, a topic on which I am quite expert, and this led me to face a colossal mountain of bullshit, in the sense that I was immediately angered, every time I read an imaginative theory on how such antennas were actually harmful, bla ... bla ..., the plot, bla .. bla ..
I have seen photos of dead birds, for example, due to a tree blown down by the wind, used to "prove" that they had actually been killed by 5G antennas.
Analyzing the amount of data existing on this topic I realized, and it must be said to be honest, that there are two studies conducted by accredited institutes, which would demonstrate the existence of a correlation between the emission of electromagnetic waves (EM) and some effect on living beings.
Recently, I get involved with Wolfram Physics Project. I did some research, and I wen down with it (oh, well, let's say I've just understood what's at the base of it). Since it's quite intresting I thought to write down two rows, as we could say...
Well, Stephen Wolfram is a reference figure in the programming and maths. He started Wolfram Alpha, a website that ties to give an answer to "every" question, using algorithms to scan an enormous database of informations. He's also responsible of Mathematica, an informatic system, used by scientist in all the world.
Well, the Wolfram Physics Project is an ambitious attempt to develop new physics about our universe. The new physics, he says, is computational. The guiding idea is that everything can be reduced to the application of simple rules to the fundamental building blocks.
Currently our understanding of the universe we live in and the physical rules that govern it is pretty good, but it has a limit. In fact, we have two rather well constructed theories, namely the theory of general relativity and quantum mechanics. They both explain their respective areas of application quite well: Relativity explains gravity and works well with large-scale models of the universe, that is, on very large entities; while Quantum Mechanics explains the relationships between particles on a subatomic scale, and therefore very small entities. So far, everything goes on, but we humans are curious, and we have already discovered that there are cases in which the two theories should be applied together, one example above all: black holes. HUGE quantities of mass (and therefore gravitational effects) enclosed in VERY SMALL dimensions, and therefore subject to quantum effects which - in fact - make us somewhat blind in this regard.
By "Theory of everything" we mean the attempt we are making, as human beings, to converge the two theories into one that is - precisely - able to explain ... EVERYTHING.
Currently the best recognized approach is String Theory, but it is proving somewhat unsatisfactory, for some.
Wolfram's idea, if I have not misunderstood, is to provide an alternative to this theory, and he wants to do it through a branch of mathematics called graph theory. It studies groups of points, or nodes, connected by lines, or edges.
You can think a little about a social network, looking at the figure below: you start with a and the "add three friends" rule is established. At the first step a will add three friends, at the second step all these 4 nodes (therefore including a) will add three friends, and so on ...
Continuing in this way, the network will soon form a very complex graph.
Wolfram's idea is that applying a rule many times creates a complex network of points and connections. His proposal is that the universe can be modeled in much the same way. The goal of physics, he suggests, would be to work out the rules that the universal chart obeys.
The key point is that a complex graph can look like geometry. For example, imagine a cube and a graph that looks like it.
In the same way that a collection of points and lines can approximate a solid cube, Wolfram argues that space itself can be a mesh that unites a series of knots. In short, Wolfram argues that extremely complex graphics resemble surfaces and volumes: adding enough nodes and connecting them with enough lines we would form a kind of lattice. The idea would be, therefore, that the space itself can be thought of as a mesh that combines a series of knots in this way.
You may be wondering what this has to do with the reunification of physical theories. Well, quantum mechanics acts on particles, which are discrete by their nature, while relativity treats the universe and gravity as a thing with continuity (and therefore NOT discrete).
I therefore believe that the basis of the project is the desire to try to see if it is possible to arrive at the theory of relativity and / or its geometry, but starting from a discrete structure, such as graphs. If it were possible, it could be a step forward ...
Stephen Wolfram believes that space itself can be a complex network of points connected together by a simple rule that is repeated several times.
On the site there are numerous examples of how one (or more) rules, applied subsequently, can lead to complex structures.
There are criticisms, some concern the lack of a basis of studies consistent with the path that he would like to take, and others mention the similarity with two other existing approaches to quantum gravity: the theory of causal sets and quantum ring gravity.
However, the project is noteworthy. First of all, Wolfram has a large audience and will do much to spread the approach it supports. Proponents of ring quantum gravity particularly complain about the predominance of string theory within the physical community. Wolfram can help support a paradigm shift in physics.
Secondly, Wolfram offers a very careful overview of the project from the basic principles of graph theory to general relativity. This will make it easier for individuals to keep up with the general approach and potentially make their own contribution.
Thirdly, the project is "open source", so it could attract, and is available, for any citizens with scientific bases, even if they are hobbyists.
In another article I talked about a particular rigged game, so let's also talk about gambling in general, at least the one we all come in contact with ...
Lotto, Roulette, Slot machines, Videopoker, etc ... all have one basic characteristic: THE MORE YOU PLAY THE MORE YOU LOSE!
And it's not me who says it, but math. IT'S SAFE! If you are patient I will prove it to you:
All games are characterized by a CONSTANT: there is always an advantage for those who keep the game, this advantage is measured in percentage, and can be clear and obvious, or "hidden", but there is ALWAYS.
For example, in Roulette, which is also the "most honest" game, you can bet on RED or BLACK, and get exactly double the payout. Regular? Yes, but don't forget the ZERO! The numbers are NOT 36, of which 18 red and 18 black, but 37!
Consequently, you are NOT 50% likely to win, but only 18/37 = 48.64%.
For the dozen, which pays 3 times, you have not 1/3 = 33.33% probability, but 12/37 = 32.43%.
This theory was exposed in two stages, in 2010 and 2014 by the Italian blogger known under the pseudonym of Uriel Fanelli, who I followed with interest in the narrative style.
I hope it won't hurt if I bring it back here because, in addition to finding it interesting and quite spot on, it came back to my mind when I took care of dismantling some hoaxes / fake news / inaccuracies on the alleged damage from exposure to electromagnetic waves, article that you find here.
This theory has been expressed in a similar and certainly more concise way, by the Italian programmer Alberto Brandolini, under the name of "Bullshit asymmetric principle", and whose statement is more or less this: The amount of energy necessary to refute a bullshit is at least an order of magnitude higher than that needed to produce it.
(This article applies to Italy, but I'm pretty sure it's the same in all other countries)
Let's talk a little bit about those new slot machines, that have appeared in a lot of tobacconists for a few days ...
To be exact, those new slot machines, authorized by the State to provide cash winnings.
I immediately state, to avoid misunderstandings, that I'm NOT gambling-addicted, and that my first and always valid advice is NOT TO PLAY THESE GAMES. This "article" comes from my passion for computer science and statistics, reasons for which I know the game of Blackjack.