macmankev

enolajay:

thelaughingmagician:

heavywoodenbox:

beelzebosss:

In the nineteenth century, a morbid and curious custom has spread to various parts of the world: the photos were ”Post Mortem”.
”Post Mortem” comes from Latin, meaning after death.

The photos ”Post Mortem” apparently originated in England, when Queen Victoria asked to photograph the corpse of an acquaintance or a relative, so she can keep as a souvenir.
soon after, this idea spread around the world, keeping a morbid reminder of loved ones that have passed on.

Even today, as strange as it may seem, some places still have this custom.

The girl who is standing in the photo is the one who is dead.

This is a classic example of photographic art. 

Notice the hands

for people wondering how the corpse is standing up, there is a posing stand supporting the body it’s very hard to see but the stand is supporting the neck, arms and back.

the girl in this picture has her eyes open, but in some cases the photographer will paint pupils on the eye lids to make it seem like they are wide awake

Since the eyes are the first to begin decomposing, I’d assume this is a very good example of the eyes being painted on rather than her real eyes.  Some of the photographers were horrific at it, but others made it look realistic. 

…Fun fact of the day for you there children…

(via voooodoooo)

Reblogged from beelzebosss May 3rd, 2013 at 1:12 am 34,931 notes

dianceee:

i’msneaky

Hey! That’s me! You sneaky-butt! I can see your butt from where I’m laying. :P

Reblogged from dianceee May 3rd, 2013 at 12:48 am 5 notes

dianceee:

i like tumbling from bed!

She’s so freaking cute!

Reblogged from dianceee May 3rd, 2013 at 12:48 am 5 notes #Also: boobs

onthewing:

I hope I’m invited to Kevin and Diane’s wedding

Damn straight you are! I want you there!

Reblogged from onthewing May 3rd, 2013 at 12:45 am 7 notes

invaderxan:

Crescent Earth

Reblogged from invaderxan May 2nd, 2013 at 12:10 pm 25 notes

dianceee:

he wanted to take a nice picture. we are really cute together, huh?

We’re fucking adorable!

Reblogged from dianceee May 2nd, 2013 at 12:46 am 6 notes #me #diane #us

dianceee:

we only have six days left together =[=[=[=[

I want more time. But I have loved being able to do just about everything with her the last two weeks. I can’t wait until we don’t have to worry about being apart again.

Reblogged from dianceee May 2nd, 2013 at 12:45 am 2 notes #Me #Diane #Us

reflectivegentleman:

Writing on Water.

Sometimes I am sinfully envious of the visually artistic.

(via conniecannibal)

Reblogged from reflectivegentleman May 2nd, 2013 at 12:28 am 45,442 notes

Just taking selfies while I wait for Diane to get off.

May 1st, 2013 at 12:39 am 2 notes #me

flippedroundagain:

maxistentialist:

Wired:

In February 2012, the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Frank Wilczek decided to go public with a strange and, he worried, somewhat embarrassing idea. Impossible as it seemed, Wilczek had developed an apparent proof of “time crystals” — physical structures that move in a repeating pattern, like minute hands rounding clocks, without expending energy or ever winding down. Unlike clocks or any other known objects, time crystals derive their movement not from stored energy but from a break in the symmetry of time, enabling a special form of perpetual motion.

“Most research in physics is continuations of things that have gone before,” said Wilczek, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This, he said, was “kind of outside the box.”

Original story reprinted with permission from Simons Science News, an editorially independent division of SimonsFoundation.org whose mission is to enhance public understanding of science by covering research developments and trends in mathematics and the physical and life sciences.

Wilczek’s idea met with a muted response from physicists. Here was a brilliant professor known for developing exotic theories that later entered the mainstream, including the existence of particles called axions and anyons, and discovering a property of nuclear forces known as asymptotic freedom (for which he shared the Nobel Prize in physics in 2004). But perpetual motion, deemed impossible by the fundamental laws of physics, was hard to swallow. Did the work constitute a major breakthrough or faulty logic? Jakub Zakrzewski, a professor of physics and head of atomic optics at Jagiellonian University in Poland who wrote a perspective on the research that accompanied Wilczek’s publication, says: “I simply don’t know.”

Fantastic article from Wired.

Very cool.

Reblogged from Wired April 30th, 2013 at 9:28 pm 69 notes