Report, edit, etc...Posted by SaLaCiouS(U) on 2004-11-03 at 17:02:28
BIOLOGY:
If you've ever taken a biology class, traits like 6 fingers have a chance of being passed down. At the least it's 1/4 (if I recall correctly), it could be more if the trait turns out to be dominant. Mutations like that are common among humans, people being born with tails or multiple heads and what not. No reason this couldn't fuel evolution.
TIME TRAVEL:
I highly doubt any of it is based on our current knowledge. Our current knowledge is actually unimaginably pathetic, I'm in a college level chemistry class and it's embarassing how contradictory our knowledge of chemistry and the universe around us actually is. There are many wierd phenomenons that are inexplainable by our current theories on science, and any one of them could prove useful in expanding the possibility of time travel.
THE SUN:
About the Sun... the Sun is a big,
ing sphere. To say that it is losing 4 feet a year or whatever your insane false statistic was is madness. Even if that were true, it's a flucking sphere. If it's burning (which like Clokr_ said, is not entirely accurate) the same amount of fuel all the time then it would have been decreasing in size MUCH slower before, because, once again, it's a SPHERE...
THE BIG BANG:
The most probable version of the theory is that the universe was a single point, which then exploded out into the Universe it is now. At some point the outward moving would slow down, and then the Universe would contract back into a single point again. Just a funny little note, that supposed point apparently has something like 10 or 12 dimensions.
GOD:
Zealot's so called "proof" is completely ing idiotic. I won't even take anything into account he says. He is clearly a religious zealot (ironic, no?) who watches too many religious television shows. The kind where they claim rock music is the work of Satan.
THE UNIVERSE:
As for the Universe... it's really, really big. So big that it's possible there is another world exactly like this one where the only difference is that my name is Bob. And there could be googleplexes of these worlds with tiny little differences. Assuming that our observations about the Universe around us are accurate, which I will assume they are, then if there is a God, he doesn't even know we're here. And he probably doesn't care.
EVOLUTION:
The theory of Evolution is a quite a hollow theory. Assuming there is no God and that the universe simply is, then what does that mean for us? It means that we're just chemicals reacting. Nothing is random in this case. The universe could only happen one possible way.
AN INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE:
Also, there was this interesting theory that every single time a quantum event occurs, two possible universes are created. Which, if this is true, as they thought it was the last time I checked, it makes you wonder, which Universe does your conciousness follow? And is everyone else following this same path? or are you truly only and the only "real" versions of other people are in some other path. Interesting I think.
If you've ever taken a biology class, traits like 6 fingers have a chance of being passed down. At the least it's 1/4 (if I recall correctly), it could be more if the trait turns out to be dominant. Mutations like that are common among humans, people being born with tails or multiple heads and what not. No reason this couldn't fuel evolution.
TIME TRAVEL:
I highly doubt any of it is based on our current knowledge. Our current knowledge is actually unimaginably pathetic, I'm in a college level chemistry class and it's embarassing how contradictory our knowledge of chemistry and the universe around us actually is. There are many wierd phenomenons that are inexplainable by our current theories on science, and any one of them could prove useful in expanding the possibility of time travel.
THE SUN:
About the Sun... the Sun is a big,
ing sphere. To say that it is losing 4 feet a year or whatever your insane false statistic was is madness. Even if that were true, it's a flucking sphere. If it's burning (which like Clokr_ said, is not entirely accurate) the same amount of fuel all the time then it would have been decreasing in size MUCH slower before, because, once again, it's a SPHERE...THE BIG BANG:
The most probable version of the theory is that the universe was a single point, which then exploded out into the Universe it is now. At some point the outward moving would slow down, and then the Universe would contract back into a single point again. Just a funny little note, that supposed point apparently has something like 10 or 12 dimensions.
GOD:
Zealot's so called "proof" is completely
ing idiotic. I won't even take anything into account he says. He is clearly a religious zealot (ironic, no?) who watches too many religious television shows. The kind where they claim rock music is the work of Satan.THE UNIVERSE:
As for the Universe... it's really, really big. So big that it's possible there is another world exactly like this one where the only difference is that my name is Bob. And there could be googleplexes of these worlds with tiny little differences. Assuming that our observations about the Universe around us are accurate, which I will assume they are, then if there is a God, he doesn't even know we're here. And he probably doesn't care.
EVOLUTION:
The theory of Evolution is a quite a hollow theory. Assuming there is no God and that the universe simply is, then what does that mean for us? It means that we're just chemicals reacting. Nothing is random in this case. The universe could only happen one possible way.
AN INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE:
Also, there was this interesting theory that every single time a quantum event occurs, two possible universes are created. Which, if this is true, as they thought it was the last time I checked, it makes you wonder, which Universe does your conciousness follow? And is everyone else following this same path? or are you truly only and the only "real" versions of other people are in some other path. Interesting I think.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PCFredZ on 2004-11-03 at 17:37:09
Salacious, I'm only going to respond to your first paragraph because the rest are just too much for my lazy self... 
What you mean is a Punnet Square. For those of you who have not reached, or forgotten about 7th grade science...
There are two genetic trait types, genotype and phenotype. Phenotype shows, while genotype does not. Say the genotype of a person contains "6 fingers", but that trait is recessive, so it doesn't show in the phenotype. "5 fingers", on the other hand, is dominate, and would show if it's present. A Punnet Square looks like this:
--|D--|R--|
D|DD|DR|
R|DR|RR|
Basically, it's like a multiplication table. One parent (top) and another parent (left), during the whole egg, sperm thing, combines into one of the four possibilities in the center. If at least one is Dominant, it will show. However, as you can see, the lower right corner has both Recessive. Since there is no other dominant, the Recessive trait will show, i.e. "6 fingers". But yes, there would be a 1/4 chance of having both recessive, which is why blondes are "going extinct".
What you mean is a Punnet Square. For those of you who have not reached, or forgotten about 7th grade science...
There are two genetic trait types, genotype and phenotype. Phenotype shows, while genotype does not. Say the genotype of a person contains "6 fingers", but that trait is recessive, so it doesn't show in the phenotype. "5 fingers", on the other hand, is dominate, and would show if it's present. A Punnet Square looks like this:
--|D--|R--|
D|DD|DR|
R|DR|RR|
Basically, it's like a multiplication table. One parent (top) and another parent (left), during the whole egg, sperm thing, combines into one of the four possibilities in the center. If at least one is Dominant, it will show. However, as you can see, the lower right corner has both Recessive. Since there is no other dominant, the Recessive trait will show, i.e. "6 fingers". But yes, there would be a 1/4 chance of having both recessive, which is why blondes are "going extinct".
Report, edit, etc...Posted by IsolatedPurity on 2004-11-04 at 00:28:27
QUOTE(SaLaCiouS(U) @ Nov 3 2004, 05:02 PM)
BIOLOGY:
If you've ever taken a biology class, traits like 6 fingers have a chance of being passed down. At the least it's 1/4 (if I recall correctly), it could be more if the trait turns out to be dominant. Mutations like that are common among humans, people being born with tails or multiple heads and what not. No reason this couldn't fuel evolution.
If you've ever taken a biology class, traits like 6 fingers have a chance of being passed down. At the least it's 1/4 (if I recall correctly), it could be more if the trait turns out to be dominant. Mutations like that are common among humans, people being born with tails or multiple heads and what not. No reason this couldn't fuel evolution.
However, if six fingers was recessive, they would have to have two genes of six fingers in order for it to exist, right? So if two parents both have six fingers, there's 100% probability their children will have six fingers, or am I missing something?
Shouldn't there be a sub classes of humans? Or, are you going to say those are called 'races'. Beyond basic looks, how come there isn't no 'race' with six fingers?
QUOTE
THE SUN:
About the Sun... the Sun is a big, ing sphere. To say that it is losing 4 feet a year or whatever your insane false statistic was is madness. Even if that were true, it's a flucking sphere. If it's burning (which like Clokr_ said, is not entirely accurate) the same amount of fuel all the time then it would have been decreasing in size MUCH slower before, because, once again, it's a SPHERE...
About the Sun... the Sun is a big,
ing sphere. To say that it is losing 4 feet a year or whatever your insane false statistic was is madness. Even if that were true, it's a flucking sphere. If it's burning (which like Clokr_ said, is not entirely accurate) the same amount of fuel all the time then it would have been decreasing in size MUCH slower before, because, once again, it's a SPHERE...Uh? Not understandable, at least, by me.
QUOTE
THE BIG BANG:
The most probable version of the theory is that the universe was a single point, which then exploded out into the Universe it is now. At some point the outward moving would slow down, and then the Universe would contract back into a single point again. Just a funny little note, that supposed point apparently has something like 10 or 12 dimensions.
The most probable version of the theory is that the universe was a single point, which then exploded out into the Universe it is now. At some point the outward moving would slow down, and then the Universe would contract back into a single point again. Just a funny little note, that supposed point apparently has something like 10 or 12 dimensions.
Funny note is, everyone seems to have their own version of this big bang theory with a different number of dimensions.
QUOTE
THE UNIVERSE:
As for the Universe... it's really, really big. So big that it's possible there is another world exactly like this one where the only difference is that my name is Bob. And there could be googleplexes of these worlds with tiny little differences. Assuming that our observations about the Universe around us are accurate, which I will assume they are, then if there is a God, he doesn't even know we're here. And he probably doesn't care.
As for the Universe... it's really, really big. So big that it's possible there is another world exactly like this one where the only difference is that my name is Bob. And there could be googleplexes of these worlds with tiny little differences. Assuming that our observations about the Universe around us are accurate, which I will assume they are, then if there is a God, he doesn't even know we're here. And he probably doesn't care.
Ever watch the movie 'The One'. It sounds somewhat like what you are talking about. However, all these worlds aren't contained in the same universe, but rather, different parallel universes.
As for God, if he did exist, he would certainly know we are here because he is all-knowing. He wouldn't have screwed up his creation to have it accidently make parallel universes.
QUOTE
EVOLUTION:
The theory of Evolution is a quite a hollow theory. Assuming there is no God and that the universe simply is, then what does that mean for us? It means that we're just chemicals reacting. Nothing is random in this case. The universe could only happen one possible way.
The theory of Evolution is a quite a hollow theory. Assuming there is no God and that the universe simply is, then what does that mean for us? It means that we're just chemicals reacting. Nothing is random in this case. The universe could only happen one possible way.
Nothing is random? That's not possible according to evolution, which is purely based upon randomness.
QUOTE
AN INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE:
Also, there was this interesting theory that every single time a quantum event occurs, two possible universes are created. Which, if this is true, as they thought it was the last time I checked, it makes you wonder, which Universe does your conciousness follow? And is everyone else following this same path? or are you truly only and the only "real" versions of other people are in some other path. Interesting I think.
Also, there was this interesting theory that every single time a quantum event occurs, two possible universes are created. Which, if this is true, as they thought it was the last time I checked, it makes you wonder, which Universe does your conciousness follow? And is everyone else following this same path? or are you truly only and the only "real" versions of other people are in some other path. Interesting I think.
Is this why we get deja vu? O.o Deja vu is a very interesting thing in of itself. Some american(?) woman supposedly went to france(?) and had such a feeling and then knew her way around the country like it was her hometown, when she never has been therebefore. I get such feelings where I know what's going to happen next, like, it all happened somehow before. Kinda makes me think...
None the less, if time travel WAS possible, how does one go back in time?
I know nothing about atomic clocks, but what if, the sheer speed just made them mess up their time? Couldn't THAT be possible? Something to do with gravitational fields and forces when more speed is achieved?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Red-X on 2004-11-04 at 00:46:03
Time travel is possible. Im doing it right now. Im traveling through time. You are too. But in the way most people think of it, no its not. yes Albert said that we would go faster around the speed of light, but at that speed a piece of space dust would rip through the hull of any spacecraft that can be built. And since time is going faster around us, the oxygen in the spacecraft would drain in a microsecond. Pop goes the astronaut. And even if you somehow managed to plot a course through space without hitting one spec of dust, you would be so far away that the odds of you returning would be even worse. You would have to get lucky and plot another perfect course. And how would slowing down from the speed of light effect us? A dead stop would probably kill us. And who knows what might happen if we gradually slow down.
ADDITION: Also with all this biology talk going on I though I'd share some info. I don't believe in evolution. So this is God's sense of humor: An ear of corn has more genes than a human being.
ADDITION: Also with all this biology talk going on I though I'd share some info. I don't believe in evolution. So this is God's sense of humor: An ear of corn has more genes than a human being.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2004-11-04 at 08:08:25
QUOTE(isolatedpurity @ Nov 4 2004, 12:28 AM)
However, if six fingers was recessive, they would have to have two genes of six fingers in order for it to exist, right? So if two parents both have six fingers, there's 100% probability their children will have six fingers, or am I missing
something? Shouldn't there be a sub classes of humans? Or, are you going to say those are called 'races'. Beyond basic looks, how come there isn't no 'race' with six fingers?
something? Shouldn't there be a sub classes of humans? Or, are you going to say those are called 'races'. Beyond basic looks, how come there isn't no 'race' with six fingers?
Because, the five finger trait is dominant. If you can get a dominant six finger trait, there will be a lot more six finger organisms.
QUOTE
Uh? Not understandable, at least, by me.
The Sun is burning things. The Sun is expanding. The Sun is over 5 billion years old.
QUOTE
Funny note is, everyone seems to have their own version of this big bang theory with a different number of dimensions.
Because nothing can be proven. But there is evidence of such things.
QUOTE
As for God, if he did exist, he would certainly know we are here because he is all-knowing. He wouldn't have screwed up his creation to have it accidently make parallel universes.
If god exists, then human beings wouldn't exist. We are a failure. We are stupid. God would have killed us all already.
QUOTE
Nothing is random? That's not possible according to evolution, which is purely based upon randomness.
Ignore him. It's random. 100% random for mutation.
QUOTE
None the less, if time travel WAS possible, how does one go back in time?
I know nothing about atomic clocks, but what if, the sheer speed just made them mess up their time? Couldn't THAT be possible? Something to do with gravitational fields and forces when more speed is achieved?
I know nothing about atomic clocks, but what if, the sheer speed just made them mess up their time? Couldn't THAT be possible? Something to do with gravitational fields and forces when more speed is achieved?
No, going back in time is theoritcally impossible. You cannot go back in time for something that has already happened.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SaLaCiouS(U) on 2004-11-04 at 08:25:50
What I meant is that NOTHING is based on chance. It's all chemical reactions. Basically it's a Godless-fate. Everything could happen ONLY one way.. it just seems "random" to us. Computers can't generate REAL random numbers, but they're random enough. It's not the same thing as true randomness. If you went back in time and ran the same program on the same computer at exactly the same time, it would generate the EXACT same "random" numbers it did the first time around. And subatomically... nope. No random events there. So if nothing is TRULY random, then the Universe could only happen one possible way.
ALSO: The sun is a sphere. Meaning if it were burning the same amount of fuel in the past, but it's radius was much larger, it would only be shrinking at a proportional rate to it's size. So maybe it was shrinking.. 1 foot per second a long time ago. Which would mean it wouldn't have been as big as you think it was a long time ago, because it was shrinking slower, not as fast. EDIT: Oh yea I don't even believe your fact is true, but if it is, this is how it happened. Disproved.
ALSO: The sun is a sphere. Meaning if it were burning the same amount of fuel in the past, but it's radius was much larger, it would only be shrinking at a proportional rate to it's size. So maybe it was shrinking.. 1 foot per second a long time ago. Which would mean it wouldn't have been as big as you think it was a long time ago, because it was shrinking slower, not as fast. EDIT: Oh yea I don't even believe your fact is true, but if it is, this is how it happened. Disproved.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Zergling[SK] on 2004-11-04 at 13:28:34
God is real, I don't know if time travel is possible, Matter CAN'T be created or lost, Time is always moving forward, and no i don't know who created god, who knows maybe he created himself 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Chill on 2004-11-04 at 14:34:04
QUOTE
You obviously don't know the concept of god if you would ask such a question.
Can you please explain in detail what exactly the concept of god is?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PCFredZ on 2004-11-04 at 16:21:37
Everything else I no longer am going to bother with but the Biology part...
Say two people has 5-finger and a 6-finger genes. They'd have 5 fingers, but if they have children, the child has a 25% chance to have 6 fingers, as in if both of his genes are 6-finger. If that child grows up to have children with someone just like him, their children will have 100% chance to have 6 fingers. The reason that we don't all have 6 fingers is that more 5-finger people who were our ancestors than 6-finger ones, and the recessive gene was probably lost or something. Then there are mutations, which I don't really know about, which kind of toss all the stuff above right out the window.
QUOTE(isloated)
However, if six fingers was recessive, they would have to have two genes of six fingers in order for it to exist, right? So if two parents both have six fingers, there's 100% probability their children will have six fingers, or am I missing something?
Say two people has 5-finger and a 6-finger genes. They'd have 5 fingers, but if they have children, the child has a 25% chance to have 6 fingers, as in if both of his genes are 6-finger. If that child grows up to have children with someone just like him, their children will have 100% chance to have 6 fingers. The reason that we don't all have 6 fingers is that more 5-finger people who were our ancestors than 6-finger ones, and the recessive gene was probably lost or something. Then there are mutations, which I don't really know about, which kind of toss all the stuff above right out the window.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by IsolatedPurity on 2004-11-04 at 16:32:32
QUOTE(CheeZe(U) @ Nov 4 2004, 08:08 AM)
Because, the five finger trait is dominant. If you can get a dominant six finger trait, there will be a lot more six finger organisms.
Yes, so in order to get six fingers, you would have to have two six finger traits. So, what I'm saying, if we get two such people together, their children will have a 100% probablility of having six fingers, right? We should try it.
QUOTE
The Sun is burning things. The Sun is expanding. The Sun is over 5 billion years old. Because nothing can be proven. But there is evidence of such things.
I google'd it for some rough idea what you are talking about. Some say it's shrinking, some say it's growing, others yet say it was shrinking but now is stable... *sigh*
Whilst searching, I found an arguement, pro-creationist side, that has to deal with this whole rain erasion thing on the mountains. With the power of water erasion, all the continents should very well be eroded away into the ocean by now with that amount of time. You could talk about how volcanoes make islands and such, but it wouldn't compare to the amount of erasion. Never heard or thought about this one before. Comments?
QUOTE
No, going back in time is theoritcally impossible. You cannot go back in time for something that has already happened.
Doesn't a dimension have to grow in infinity both ways for it to actually be a dimension? Such as your basic geometric plane.
QUOTE(Chill @ Nov 4 2004, 02:34 PM)
Can you please explain in detail what exactly the concept of god is?
All powerful, all knowing, omnipresent...
QUOTE
Keyword: theory. Time is considered to be the fourth dimension, so THEORETICALLY I suppose the little "dot" to begin with was only 1 dimension, i.e. no time existing.
How convenient. Time didn't exist before the dot exploded. That's not even logical. Events can't happen without time existing. If there is no time, the dot could have never exploded, it should have just been suspended. None the less, somehow this dot just magically appeared out of no where? I guess this one dimensional dot evolved from partial dimension space 'matter'? Look at the bigger picture... think outside the box.
Addition: I just realized something... you all can't defend the big bang theory because it's a "theory", but what, evolution ISN'T? In order for something to be a scientific law, does it NOT have to go through the scientific process? Isn't one of those steps OBSERVATION. You can't observer species changing into species because it takes millions upon millions of years, yet somehow, it's held as scientific truth? So tell me how evolution isn't going aganist the basic priciples of science. Seriously. Evolution is an abomination of science that's being forcecd upon people any way possible. Scientists will avoid any logical scientific disprovement of their precious theory of evolution to such high degrees, it's sickening.
Evolution IS a religion in of itself. You have to believe what you believe in blind faith just like we believe in God in blind faith. There is no *real* scientific reasoning behind evolution. You just trust it's real. You can't prove it. No matter what you say, you simply can't.
Lisk: "Show me God" Me: "Show me one cell organisms evolving into humans"
I can't, you can't. We are in the same boat. Blind faith.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by StarEditron 4000 on 2004-11-04 at 16:55:55
hey, about time travel, we haven't discussed the part where we can fly around the sun at the speed of light.
Start Arguing...
Start Arguing...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SaLaCiouS(U) on 2004-11-04 at 16:59:36
This topic was getting too much into God or the lack thereof, so I made my own topic here: http://www.staredit.net/index.php?showtopic=7044
Report, edit, etc...Posted by n2o-SiMpSoNs on 2004-11-04 at 17:28:25
I think that if it was possible to go back in time to change something it would just happen in a different way because you cant change your destiny. Watch the movie the Time Machine it is a vErY good movie and shows what i mean.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by iamandragon on 2004-11-11 at 04:16:41
QUOTE(Screwed @ Oct 29 2004, 03:00 AM)
I believe it is possible to go forwards in time, but it is currently 'impossible' to go back in time.
Albert Einstein has developed a theory that says the faster you travel, the slower time goes around you. (It has been scientiically proven with accurate clocks and jet places) It is not a speed difference of just a few km per second, the changes in time around different speeds only vary greatly when you travel to around 87% of the speed of light or more. If you travel really fast, You are not necessarily travelling to a different dimension of another time, but because the time around you is going slower - the world around you is travelling relatively faster. In this way, it seems like you have gone to the future. Albert stated that there is no direct time or space. What you are seeing now is actually what has happened perhaps 1 millionth of a second before you saw the object.
The theory of relativity is also very intersting, Isaac Newton once said that everything around the universe travel at different speeds, however Einstein said that if everything travels at different speeds it is impossible to measure speed correctly because you can only calculate speed in relation to another object. Say for example, the Earth is moving 3 km/ second, but a tree on earth seems as if it is not moving 3 km/ second. Only because you are also travelling 3km/ second so it seems stationary.
However, Eintein also stated it is impossible to travel faster than the speed of light because to do that, your mass would be 0, and being 0 would mean you never existed. (black holes should also have mass because if black holes have such strong gravity - it must have mass. However everything that goes into a black hole collapses so I'm pretty unsure how it works - Sowwi, I don't specialise this area).
Nonetheless, physically I believe it is possible to see the past... if the universe is significantly cirucular, if there was a lend powerful enough to bend and capture light that revolves light around the universe once, what we see in the lens would have taken place many years before we saw it.
Another theory is that because the universe is expanding, (big bang theory) time is going forward... when the universe start to contract, time may go backwards. However I do not believe in this theory ( i believe in big bang, but not 'if the universe contract time goes backward') because it has many holes and is a sweeping statement.
Black holes and worm holes may also be a possibility of time travel, but I will cover those later and get you guys posting.
[right][snapback]91525[/snapback][/right]
Albert Einstein has developed a theory that says the faster you travel, the slower time goes around you. (It has been scientiically proven with accurate clocks and jet places) It is not a speed difference of just a few km per second, the changes in time around different speeds only vary greatly when you travel to around 87% of the speed of light or more. If you travel really fast, You are not necessarily travelling to a different dimension of another time, but because the time around you is going slower - the world around you is travelling relatively faster. In this way, it seems like you have gone to the future. Albert stated that there is no direct time or space. What you are seeing now is actually what has happened perhaps 1 millionth of a second before you saw the object.
The theory of relativity is also very intersting, Isaac Newton once said that everything around the universe travel at different speeds, however Einstein said that if everything travels at different speeds it is impossible to measure speed correctly because you can only calculate speed in relation to another object. Say for example, the Earth is moving 3 km/ second, but a tree on earth seems as if it is not moving 3 km/ second. Only because you are also travelling 3km/ second so it seems stationary.
However, Eintein also stated it is impossible to travel faster than the speed of light because to do that, your mass would be 0, and being 0 would mean you never existed. (black holes should also have mass because if black holes have such strong gravity - it must have mass. However everything that goes into a black hole collapses so I'm pretty unsure how it works - Sowwi, I don't specialise this area).
Nonetheless, physically I believe it is possible to see the past... if the universe is significantly cirucular, if there was a lend powerful enough to bend and capture light that revolves light around the universe once, what we see in the lens would have taken place many years before we saw it.
Another theory is that because the universe is expanding, (big bang theory) time is going forward... when the universe start to contract, time may go backwards. However I do not believe in this theory ( i believe in big bang, but not 'if the universe contract time goes backward') because it has many holes and is a sweeping statement.
Black holes and worm holes may also be a possibility of time travel, but I will cover those later and get you guys posting.
[right][snapback]91525[/snapback][/right]
I think there is a lot of mistakes in here:
First, it's stated that when your speed gets closer to the speed of light, your mass gets heavier and heavier to infinatity. we all know that Ft = m(v-u), and if that converts to F=ma. To reach the speed of light you need a value of great a. And as you get close to the speed of light, your m increases, making the a lower if force is consistant. And when your mass is infinate, you CANNOT accelerate any more and therefore you will never reach the speed of light. Electrons have a velocity of c in vacume, and that's the speed of light--but that's only an estimate. Infact, they travell with ta velocity somewhat lower than c, and no, they don't get to the speed of light.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by idoL on 2004-11-11 at 05:50:39
Sexcuse me, pleze.. but zis all can be solved wizth a zimple binary math function:
Time Ratio is: 1^*(tangetl; of time*is; is; +)/0) function
%6/0) = *time, space*(/0)=*travel of; ?(obj)*percent*ratio^of (1//stringobj;)
(if=time* = 0 obj, then space*time/slower=faster^tang; obj*string/of/null/0)*function0^
then = space; ratio of time.) = null string.
/*string) tanget/* ^1=2=3=4=5=6=7=8=9=*string, null if_0)^functions of; + or - (*time)/end of "sub" [-] of "plus" [+] to -0th;+0th strings; ((/*+1-9int -0*; 1^0*of string/1)
I implore you to dizprove my theory that travel is irrational to functions of space becaue time is a space-factored object only if 0th strings are phisically alterd, meaning travel = tangible objections at space and times discretion. Which means time travel couldnt happen.
Time Ratio is: 1^*(tangetl; of time*is; is; +)/0) function
%6/0) = *time, space*(/0)=*travel of; ?(obj)*percent*ratio^of (1//stringobj;)
(if=time* = 0 obj, then space*time/slower=faster^tang; obj*string/of/null/0)*function0^
then = space; ratio of time.) = null string.
/*string) tanget/* ^1=2=3=4=5=6=7=8=9=*string, null if_0)^functions of; + or - (*time)/end of "sub" [-] of "plus" [+] to -0th;+0th strings; ((/*+1-9int -0*; 1^0*of string/1)
I implore you to dizprove my theory that travel is irrational to functions of space becaue time is a space-factored object only if 0th strings are phisically alterd, meaning travel = tangible objections at space and times discretion. Which means time travel couldnt happen.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by iamandragon on 2004-11-11 at 08:53:47
Time travel is...just...impossible...trust me and idoL...both our theories supports that fair and square...
Unless you can revive Albert and Issac!
Unless you can revive Albert and Issac!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Sinister_X on 2004-11-11 at 11:23:23
There are problems. The commonest are the so-called paradoxes. For example, if we could travel through time, imagine what would happen to a time traveller if he (or she) travelled back in time and killed his own grandmother at birth. In theory the time traveller will therefore never be born, so the journey could never have been made in the first place; but if the journey never occurred then the grandmother would be born which means the time traveller would have been born and could make the journey ... and so on and so on. This is a paradox.
There are two possibilities to resolve this paradox. The first is that the past is totally defined, i.e. everything that has happened or must happen, including the time traveler's attempt to kill his grandmother, cannot be altered and nothing will change the course of history. In other words, the time traveller will experience endless "mishaps" in trying to kill his grandmother and will never achieve the murder, thus keeping time (or at least events) intact.
i found this its kind of interesting what i want to know is that if the past is set and cannot be alterd does that mean that the past me was in a sence immortal because if this is accurite and i traveld into the past and told my past self this then logiclly he could never cie and could jump off a building and not die or at least not until i die correct
There are two possibilities to resolve this paradox. The first is that the past is totally defined, i.e. everything that has happened or must happen, including the time traveler's attempt to kill his grandmother, cannot be altered and nothing will change the course of history. In other words, the time traveller will experience endless "mishaps" in trying to kill his grandmother and will never achieve the murder, thus keeping time (or at least events) intact.
i found this its kind of interesting what i want to know is that if the past is set and cannot be alterd does that mean that the past me was in a sence immortal because if this is accurite and i traveld into the past and told my past self this then logiclly he could never cie and could jump off a building and not die or at least not until i die correct
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PCFredZ on 2004-11-11 at 15:55:52
So God was reading this post and he said, Shoot, I wonder where I sent Colonel Sanders then...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by iamandragon on 2004-11-11 at 19:46:04
QUOTE(StarEditron 4000 @ Nov 4 2004, 04:55 PM)
hey, about time travel, we haven't discussed the part where we can fly around the sun at the speed of light.
Start Arguing...
[right][snapback]94492[/snapback][/right]
Start Arguing...
[right][snapback]94492[/snapback][/right]
You can't-can't-can't travel at the speed of light. You mass will get to infinate.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PCFredZ on 2004-11-12 at 17:07:59
Humans can't handle the conditions created at traveling such a high speed. When you get into the higher Machs you already start to lose conciousness.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by iamandragon on 2004-11-13 at 07:22:15
It's not about loosing concious! You can't get faster than the speed of light! That's how time travelling is impossible! Come on!