Real Wheel To Wheel Racing.

i play the harp and tom plays the violin by the way . just remembered this little bit . Hahahhahahahsjshxkehdkexiowjdowkx IMISSHIM

cheers to whoever wrote literally the most perfect angela prompt imaginable

in another reality i am tongue-fucking him . but sure. Let me suffer through a two hour physics exam. sure. great

never take high level physics if you know whats good for you i SWEAARRRR

When someone asks me why I want to permashift I typically say because I want to be with my comfort characters.

But on a deeper level I’d say I want to permashift because of how disgusting this world is towards women. Once I started realizing that literally every man I know has said something misogynistic I realized ya’ll were being for real when saying “most men”. I feel as there is no hope for women here, at least not with the way men are stirring today. Misogyny is so deeply woven through society that I even struggle imagining how life would be without it. I sometimes wish I could go back to being oblivious to this bigotry, I also think this is why a lot of women push back on feminism because it really brings an awareness to one’s self that life isn’t going to treat you the same. The sexualization in particular is something that really upsets me. The way movies and shows always have female nudity, the way women are posed in ads or magazines. It’s like we cannot be just human. The way everyone manages to point their finger to a woman every single time something happens, including women. Misogyny is so bad in our culture that even women are against women. Men’s needs will always be put over women’s needs whether its standards or medically. This is a topic that plagues my mind everyday and gets me incredibly upset, so much so that it’s my biggest motivation to permashift.

16 likes on tiktok is embarrassing but 16 likes on tumblr is like winning a grammy

her st𝔂le …………………

monochrome is fun . i have nothing else to say this is a fun little moodboard

thinking ……………:::.

chaelisa ♡ྀི

"DON'T WORRY, BABY"...1960s FAME DR² INTRO

— DINAH C. COLE, 22 (b. november 24, 1941) is an american singer-songwriter, musician, and former commercial model. she is widely known first as legendary jazz pianist and singer, NAT KING COLE's daughter and second as new member of THE RONETTES. after being scouted in 1962, she contributed a large role to the group's success, writing hits such as BE MY BABY and CHAPEL OF LOVE proving her nepotism isn't just in her blood but also talent in music.

"EVERYTHING WILL TURN OUT ALRIGHT"

— BRIAN WILSON, (b. june 20, 1942) is an american musician, singer-songwriter and producer who co-founded the BEACH BOYS in 1961. ever since he heard BE MY BABY he became a big fan of THE RONETTES, specifically of DINAH whom he grew very fond about from first up-close glance. because of this unlikely pairing, the two become widely known as the STAR-CROSSED LOVERS of 60s music.

updated. 04.08.25 | PINTEREST BOARD

"proving" shifting through scientific evidence (& philosophic theory)

this post is heavily inspired by @voldyateme on tiktok. i saw her video and decided to do research on my own, and write a detailed post about this topic to make myself understand better. i also would like to mention that some of the claims irene made in her tiktok were wrong (and biased) i also wanted to clear some things up for myself.

fyi: long post ahead. this took me three days to understand and write. i might still be a bit unclear on my understanding of some aspects, but to avoid having to write a whole novel on the subject, i simplified my findings and shortened them by a lot.

-

john clauser is a physicist who won the nobel peace prize in 2022 for his work on quantum entanglement. his theory confirms that quantum particles can be entangled across vast distances, and that their behaviors are instantly connected, even if they're light years apart.

a very simplified example:

i: you create two entangled particles

ii: you send particle A to tokyo, and particle B to paris

iii: a person in tokyo measures particle A and sees it spinning up, then instantly, meaning instantly, faster than light, the person in paris will know particle B is spinning down

this is simply based on particle A or B's observation, w/o there having to be sent any message or signal between them. they behave as if they're one system - not two separate ones.

the moment you measure one particle, you're instantly aware of the other particle's state.

⭒ relating quantum entanglement to shifting:

okay so now we know that entangled particles act as of they're one system, even through long distances. so, if everything was once connected to the big bang, then on some level, everything may still be entangled. meaning you, your consciousness and other "versions" of yourself in other realities.

this could therefore suggest that we are already connected to all possible versions of ourselves. they exist within a quantum field of potential, and our awareness can shift between these versions by tuning into the version we desire - essentially by choosing a different frequency.

say you're listening to the radio. you know that you’re able to listen to any radio broadcast because there are thousands playing at the same exact time, but you choose which one to listen to, knowing you have the choice to change it to another.

it's the same exact with shifting. you know that there are endless versions of you in existence right this moment - you only have to choose to become aware of your desired self.

-

john wheeler, another physicist, proved that reality is directly linked to our consciousness and what we observe. it's been demonstrated that particles don't move until they're actually observed. so if we're not observing something, it doesn't have a definite state at all. this is called the "observer effect"

the effect has challenged and in some ways helped disprove einstein's theory of realism. einstein believed that that the physical world exists independently of whether we observe it or not.

example: according to einstein, if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to observe it, the tree still falls. this is shown to be false on a quantum level. that said, we can't w/ certainty say that the tree does (or doesn’t) exist if no one is perceiving it (confusing, trust me, i know)

wheeler also proved that particles will change their makeup based on our choices and observation. simplified, this means that reality doesn't fully decide its state until it's observed. it can have different outcomes, and our choices affect the past behavior of particles.

⭒ relating the observer effect to shifting:

we know that quantum particles don't take on a definite form or "reality" until they're observed. this implies that our observation plays a direct role in shaping reality - not just by watching, but also deciding. this implies that reality isn't fixed, but fluid, shaped by our decisions, thoughts and observations and means we can "choose" our reality.

quantum physics shows that reality isn't fixed until observed, observation and consciousness do play a key role and that multiple outcomes are possible. so our consciousness focus can be said to be the mechanism that "shifts" us into a desired timeline or reality.

-

way before quantum physics existed, george berkley, a philosopher in the 1700s argued the idea "to be is to be perceived", which is eerily similar to what scientists are exploring today.

he believed that physical objects don't exist independently of our own perception. so if no one is for example perceiving a tree, then it doesn't exist.

berkeley said that there is no such thing as matter existing on its own w/o a mind to perceive it. BUT! there's a twist. you see, berkley also argued the existence of God being necessary to explain how the world works within his theory of perception and idealism.

okay so, to simplify because it can be really confusing:

i: physical things only exist if they're being perceived.

ii: when humans aren't perceiving things, God is.

iii: the reason why the world keeps existing even when we're not looking is because God is always "watching".

this raises the question: if we're not perceiving something, and the only reason it exists because God is, then how do we know it actually exists when we're not perceiving it?

berkeley responded:

"we know it exists because we can come back and perceive it again, and it behaves consistently"

if you look at a tree, walk away, come back. it's still there. berkeley argued that you assume the tree existed the whole time because when you go back, the tree would still be there, at the exact same spot.

this consistency would therefore be explained by God's continuous perception of it. so even though you didn't perceive it the whole time, the fact that reality is orderly and consistent is reliable "proof" that something (God) kept it there.

critics have argued back that assuming God is perceiving all the time isn't proof that He actually is, so how would we know that?

the answer is: w/o God, things would just pop in and out of existence every time we blink and that doesn't happen. so God is used to explain why the world is consistent and stable even when we're not watching.

you can't personally perceive something that you're not perceiving, but you trust that it's still there when you go back there, because of God.

berkeley's theory is still relevant today because the things he imagined in the 1700s do line up w/ scientific discoveries today and i resonate w/ his theory, so i just had to include it even though God’s existence isn’t proven. it’s fascinating, really.

⭒ relating george’s idealism to reality shifting:

if, like berkeley said, things only exist when they're being perceived, and if reality stays consistent because someone is always perceiving it, then that means perception isn't just passive, it's creative and shapes what exists.

this ties back to shifting beacuse it suggests that your desired reality doesn't need to "appear" in front of you for it to be real - it only needs to be perceived. if you consciously focus on your dr, perceiving it in your mind as real, then by berkeley's logic, it is real, maybe not in the physical sense just yet, but within the field of awareness that gives rise to reality in the first place.

so basically: if reality is perception based, and you're perceiving your dr, then you're giving form to something that exists because you're actively perceiving it, and you are capable of being in that place.