The unofficial weird/great/stupid questions thread

Anything Goes

Postby buttsie » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:37 am

I kind of feel left out not receiving ways of enlarging my third leg

Luckily I know snake oil salesman Dr mercola
http://www.mercola.com/
buttsie
 
Posts: 7189
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:45 pm
Location: Australia

Postby quick_wit » Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:47 am

why do some americans assume that overweight women are fat dykes? I have come across people in the internet who thinks so.
User avatar
quick_wit
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 2:36 am
Location: Philippines

Postby Kazuya » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:02 pm

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:The error you are making here is that you are taking something that doesn't work when imagined and trying to make it work in real life. Something that doesn't work in your imagination can't be made to work in real life. BUT.. what is imagined in that optical illusion that doesn't work can be made real in the real world.. you can make optical illusions that only work from one viewing angle.
Have you read my post? I can perfectly imagine to assemble that triangle. I can perfectly imagine the pendulum that I described, but it can not exist, because it is a perpetuum mobile. I can imagine an apple tree with apples flying upwards. But there will never be such a tree in reality. Take three sticks and really build that triangle.

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:I stand by what I said.. if our feeble minds here on earth can imagine anything I suspect it can be made possible one way or another by a civilization that is technolohicially mature. We are technological amoeba. And look back in the past.. we can acheive today things we would have never ever imagined in the past.

And think of the things that people have imagined in the past, where we know today, that they can not work.
Image
This directly falsifies your hypothesis. People imagined it to work.

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:This is all semantics.
No, your not even getting close to the point. Your theory of an existing possibility contradicts observations. That's the point. It doesn't matter what you understand under "the apple falls down". When we both stand in front of an apple tree and the event that I'm refering to occurs, you will see the same thing that I see.

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:How can you or anyone say time travel isn't possible when there are things in science we don't have any understanding of.. like gravity.
Maybe YOU have no understanding of gravity. But don't impose that others share your lack of understanding.
I would advise you to delve into Albert Einsteins "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper" (on electrodynamics of moving bodies) This is the special theory of relativity, that explains how the timeflow of two different inertial systems can become asynchronous. The timeflow of inertial system A will become slower relativly to inertial system B by moving system A along a vector, thats length value is higher than the length value of moving vector of system B. What you need to do, in order to bring the timeflow of system A to a halt, is to acclerate system A to the speed of light, while system B has to stand still. And here comes the catch. Systems that conatin energy when standing still can not acclerate to the speed of light, because of:
Image
Just look what happens to the relative mass (m rel) if the velocity (v) of a systems equals the speed of light in the vacuum (c).
All systems that have a mass when standing still, also have energy. This is what the famous:
Image
says.
So you might be able, to slow the timeflow down, but you can not reverse it. It is impossible


PERFECTaNATomy wrote:Your example of experiments proving time travel to the past is impossible is like someone in Isaac Newton's day making a stone bird, throwing it off a cliff and saying man made flight is impossible, simply because they had never seen materials that would allow man to fly.. nor tools that would allow them to create materials to allow man to fly.
For an analogy to be valid, it has to be analogous. In Isaak Newtons time, I just need to point to a bird and it would be obvious, that there is a way to fly. I then would have shot down a bird, dissect and analyse it and we would have had at least an idea to make it possible for man to fly. My point was, that even if a theory is wrong, there are still the observations. When a theory contradicts an observation, then the theory is wrong and not the observation. The timedilatations, lengthcontractions and the addition theorem of velocities that were predicted by Einstein have been observed and confirmed. So there is no way of "falsifying" those effects. You could just as well try to find a triangle where the sum of the inner angles does not equal 180 degrees.

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:Scientists are basically professional observers. When you can only see part of the picture, it is fololish to make predictions about what can or can't be done.
I haven't even started to talk about "decoherence". This also forbids to travel backwards in time. But I take it, that you had never before taken action to learn about the theory of relativity or quantuum physics. Its not foolish to gather the information that are available and base your decisions on them. But using wishful thinking and imagination to decide what can be done in reality or not is foolish. Just name one (in numbers: 1) physical effect, technological application or scientific theory that indicates the possibility of reversing the timeflow. Just name one. You will have a hard time finding it, because this is not the famous search for the needle in the haystack. This is the search for the needle in a needleless haystack.
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby Kazuya » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:05 pm

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:Kazuya, you claim we understand gravity, yet the rotational speeds of galaxies doesn't match our models according to our physics.. so we created the mysterious dark matter to account for all the unseen matter that is supposed to be there to match our models..

We don't even know what accounts for 90% of the universe's mass.. we don't know diddly squat.

To claim something/anything is impossible at this stage of the game would be beyond dumb..


Where do I begin? It is right, that there a galaxies, that have high rotation speeds and that those galaxies were ought to fly appart, because their calculated masses were to small to keep them together. It is wrong to say that dark matter was invented just to keep our understanding of gravity alive. How did astronomers calculate the masses of that galaxies? They meassure the radiation that is emitted from those galaxies and they found out, that some of them do not emit enough radiation. So it appeared that their mass was to low. However, the radiation follows geodesic lines, which are bent too strong, to be caused by that matter, that does radiate. So, because of those geodesic lines, we know that there is something, that bends spacetime. The only thing that we know that is capable doing that, is energy in the form of matter and this stuff always emits radiation. But this thing that bends the spacetime in those galaxies does not give off radiation. So it is called "dark matter". The fact that we don't know the structur or composition of that thing, is irrelevant. We observe that it bends spacetime. And what is gravity in the common theory of relativity? Bent spacetime. That's it.

So your statement that the radiation speed doesn't match with our understanding of gravity is not only false, because the phenomenon you have given rather implies the existence of dark matter. But it is also ignorant of the development that science had made in the past. I conclude from your statements, that your understanding of gravity comes from Isaak Newton. No serious astronomer or scientist uses Newtons theory of gravity, when it comes to astronomous objects like solar systems or galaxies. Newtons theory of gravity is only used in special cases where the error is small enough to be ignorable. It fails to explain the orbit of mercury for example.
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby vessel » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:10 pm

What the hell do people see in Tyler Perry?
User avatar
vessel
 
Posts: 2825
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:39 am
Location: Washington

Postby Kazuya » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:20 pm

vessel wrote:What the hell do people see in Tyler Perry?

Who is Tyler Perry?

Give me a picture and I tell you what I see. :wink:
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby vessel » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:32 pm

Filmmaker and play director who panders to a black audience, but does huge box office. IMDB him, I'm lazy.

He sucks, very preachy, and a lousy writer and director by any standards.
User avatar
vessel
 
Posts: 2825
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:39 am
Location: Washington

Postby plop » Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:11 am

I won't start a flare war.
"The heart has reasons that reason can not understand" Blaise Pascal :D
User avatar
plop
 
Posts: 5014
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: Caracas, Venezuela

Postby maverick88 » Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:29 pm

How come when you want to be left alone that's when people start talking to you and when you want to talk to people nobody does?
"If it's Sunday, it's Meet The Press" - Tim Russert
maverick88
 
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:08 pm
Location: United States - Wisconsin

Postby Kazuya » Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:50 pm

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:
The fact that we don't know the structur or composition of that thing, is irrelevant.


You think that not knowing what comprises over 95 percent of the mass of the universe is irrelevant?

Either our physics is fundamentally wrong OR we are ignorant of what comprises nearly the entire universe.. whichever one of those is true, it illustrates how little we know. And again.. if you know so little, especially about the fundamental physics of our universe, and our technology is so limited, it creates an entire universe of possibilities.

Quote mining my statements does not invalidate my point. I talked about the structure of space time and dark matter in reference to our understanding of gravity, which you claimed was faulty. Nowhere did I post that the structure of dark matter is irrelevant for the understanding of our universe. Remember, you brought up gravity and that was what I was talking about. By extending my statement to the understanding of the universe and attacking that position, you are pulling a straw man.

Have you found a scientific theory or physical effect that indicates the possibility of reversing the timeflow?
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby Kazuya » Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:45 pm

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:
Quote mining my statements does not invalidate my point


How ironic.
Is that all you have to say?
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby vessel » Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:46 pm

Is this an argument or a debate?
User avatar
vessel
 
Posts: 2825
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:39 am
Location: Washington

Postby Kazuya » Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:01 pm

vessel wrote:Filmmaker and play director who panders to a black audience, but does huge box office. IMDB him, I'm lazy.

He sucks, very preachy, and a lousy writer and director by any standards.
I never encountered one of his movies. It's quite strange, that I have never heard of him, because europeans love boring and preachy movies.
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby Kazuya » Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:04 pm

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:
Kazuya wrote:
PERFECTaNATomy wrote:
Quote mining my statements does not invalidate my point


How ironic.
Is that all you have to say?


I think that sums it up pretty well. Do you not understand my point?

I am afraid I do. But I hoped for the best. I'm afraid you don't understand why the structure of dark matter is irrelevant for timetravel.
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

Postby Kazuya » Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:51 pm

PERFECTaNATomy wrote:You are contradicting yourself again, Kazuya.

You said I was "quote mining", and misrepresenting your statement.. then you respond by repeating exactly what I quoted you saying.

Maybe you have a hard time understanding a statement when it consists of more than one sentence.
Maybe that little list will help you:


-Is the structure of dark matter relevant for the impossibility of travelling back in time?
The answer is: No.
-Is the structure of dark matter relevant for our undertstanding of gravity?
The answer is: No.
-Is the structure of dark matter relevant for our understanding of the universe?
The answer is: Yes.


You took a single sentence from me and brought it into a totally different context. This was about gravity and timetravel. I referred to gravity and you started to talk about our understanding of the universe, that I never addressed in the first place. Why? Because we don't need to fully understand the universe. We need to understand what time is, what its characteristics are and which laws of nature are applicable to it. It is irrelevant for time, what dark matter exactly is, as much as the next lottery numbers will affect sunradiation.
I'm a dude you don't know and I approve this message.
User avatar
Kazuya
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: KWh OT Ndl

PreviousNext

Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests