A few things that noone can ever understand.

[Mythrandir]

Originally posted by za gophar
if you shoot an arrow at a target, the arrow must go halfway. once it gets halfway, it must go half of the remaining distance. then it goes half of THAT remaining distance. if keeps on cutting the remaining distance in half... but how the hell does it hit the target? IN FACT, how could the arrow even begin to move? in order for it to get halfway to the target at all, it must get a fourth of the way first.. and so on....

You're not only cutting the distance in half, you're also cutting the time in half.
The only thing you're proving with that is something can't move when the elapsed time is 0.

[Mythrandir]

Also, point 3 and 4 aren't really that hard to grasp....

Darwin started off with his 'Origin of Species', remember the quite recent discovery of DNA. And there are some popular theories about the very first life-forms.

And don't forget about the scientific study 'Self organizing systems', or the use of Neural Networks and Genetic Algorithms to solve logical problems.

-

Viruses may not be considered as alife, but we do know very well how they work and what they do (maybe not into the smallest detail).

-

So yes, the concept life is quite comprehendable, although not completely understood, not yet.

Though I think you're right with point 1 and 2.

[MetalKid]

How about we look at e=mc^2 for a bit. Now, in theory, if we can change a mass into energy, we should be able to change energy back into any mass of our choosing correct? If so, replicators!
However, c^2 is a huge number, so you would need extreme amounts of energy in order for it to work... Unless you can change matter instantly to energy and then back to matter again.

The big bang theory dealy. I think that there is our universe and another one that is the complete opposite of this one. They say that the universe is expanding and that it will eventually contract (since its slowing down). What if there a inverse universe that is intertwined with this one? When we reach our biggest, it reaches it smallest, then it grows back again and vice versa. Take blackholes for example. Nothing escapes them, even light. Well, where does all the stuff, including light, go to when sucked into a blackhole? It's gotta go somewhere! Which is why I think that the other universe is made soley of pure light and a "sun" there would provide darkess/shadow. (No, I was not high when I was thinking this stuff up a year or 2 ago.. Just really bored)

[Mythrandir]

Originally posted by MetalKid
How about we look at e=mc^2 for a bit. Now, in theory, if we can change a mass into energy, we should be able to change energy back into any mass of our choosing correct? If so, replicators!
However, c^2 is a huge number, so you would need extreme amounts of energy in order for it to work... Unless you can change matter instantly to energy and then back to matter again.

We already know how to convert mass into energy, and vice versa.
And the problem with replicating is not that we are unable to create specific elements (mass). It is just impossible to read out the entire state of a human being without changing the state of the human being (see also: http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/208/jan27/hup.html ). However, theoritically it's possible to teleport object (see: http://www.research.ibm.com/quantumi...ion/index.html ), though it's unlikely we'll be able to in the future.
You would need perfect control of matter to arrange billions of particles in one specific order.

Originally posted by MetalKid

The big bang theory dealy. I think that there is our universe and another one that is the complete opposite of this one. They say that the universe is expanding and that it will eventually contract (since its slowing down). What if there a inverse universe that is intertwined with this one? When we reach our biggest, it reaches it smallest, then it grows back again and vice versa. Take blackholes for example. Nothing escapes them, even light. Well, where does all the stuff, including light, go to when sucked into a blackhole? It's gotta go somewhere! Which is why I think that the other universe is made soley of pure light and a "sun" there would provide darkess/shadow. (No, I was not high when I was thinking this stuff up a year or 2 ago.. Just really bored)

A black hole isn't literally a hole, it's just a shitload of mass. Even light gets sucked in, but all it does is add up to the total mass (and energy) of the black hole.



Your 'opposite universe' thought sounds overly complicated, ever heard about Occam's Razor?

[RogerMexico]

In exciting news, we can teleport photons of light now! I'm totally for this.

[Sleepy Weasel]

Originally posted by dare
i'm searching.. searching for the intellectual aspect in your rant sleepy

i don't see it

that whole situation is based on the assumption that both are travelling at the same speed, which is not the case, so runners overtake each other

simple as that

o_O

heh, well obviously it's not sound logic, since runners can pass others so there is something wrong with it. But forget the fact that you know it's obviously not true, and look at the mathmatics presented, the fact that you always have to do more when you reach the previous spot. It's the same concept as the arrow never being able to reach the target because it keeps having to travel half the distance. We know both can happen, but you can really confuse yourself about how it happens when questions are presented like this, it's hard to figure out what exactly is wrong with the theory. The idea presented is that when you reach the spot he was at, he's now further along, or with the arrow you still have half of the new distance to travel. But really it's just messing with the mathematics of limits, by considering only the disance and not also the time involved, which is approaching the limit of 0 as the two near each other. Eventually in both situations the limit is reached, the runner is passed, the arrow hits the mark.

[FudLe Pucker]

astronomy 101: black holes are NOT holes. and they're aren't just shitloads of mass. Black holes are actually stars, evolved versions of neutron stars, highly compressed stars where 1 cm^3 = up to 1 billion tons. Neutron stars like black holes cannot produce much light, only x rays. Black holes cannot emmit anything , well excluding a massive force of gravity. And btw, in my previous thread someone said "planets cant be bigger than stars", well all of neutron stars and blackholes arent bigger than a couple of kilometers in radius.

Oh yeah, i just read an article on the fourth dimension, its pretty cool actually. Time appears to be the fourth dimension, and 3d objects around us are actually 4d. why is time a dimension? well think about this. You cant say that an object is actually an object if it doesnt exist any amount of time, right? (in real life, not in a computer design proggy)

[CommanderEnder]

I never thought any of us playing this game could actually have an intelligent conversation with out any "STFU," "noob," "I will own you" or any of that. Good job! :thumbs up:

[Salubrious]

I think my brain is having a break down...

Edit: Can one of you people do my homework for me?

[TelC@t]

Originally posted by za gophar
if you shoot an arrow at a target, the arrow must go halfway. once it gets halfway, it must go half of the remaining distance. then it goes half of THAT remaining distance. if keeps on cutting the remaining distance in half... but how the hell does it hit the target? IN FACT, how could the arrow even begin to move? in order for it to get halfway to the target at all, it must get a fourth of the way first.. and so on....

I assume you haven't learnt the limit theory in calculus ...
I will give you an example using this theory ... it's easier to understand it this way ...

Say the arrow is travelling at 1m/s over 1 m distance ... for the 1st 0.5 sec, the arrow travels half of the whole distance, then uses half of 0.5 sec to travel half of the remaining distance ...

This becomes a maths problem of the infinite sum ... but since the time interval is halved each time, we can use the fomula for the limit theory ... by applying the formula, you will get the correct answer of 1.

I can't remember the equation on the top of my head. But its probably in year 12 or 1yr collage calculus text books.

[TelC@t]

Originally posted by Sleepy Weasel
Also if you people are interested in intellectual type stuff, I suggest reading the book "Genius - The life and science of richard feynman" by James Gleick sometime. My brother recommended it to me and it's pretty good.

Personally I think you trust books too much. But then again, most of the people do.

[TelC@t]

Originally posted by Mythrandir
However, theoritically it's possible to teleport object (see: http://www.research.ibm.com/quantumi...ion/index.html ), though it's unlikely we'll be able to in the future.
You would need perfect control of matter to arrange billions of particles in one specific order.
A black hole isn't literally a hole, it's just a shitload of mass. Even light gets sucked in, but all it does is add up to the total mass (and energy) of the black hole.

The things you have mentioned above are theories, and theories are built on the top of a lot of assumptions.

Just in case you do not know, Einsteins' theory of relativity has failed in every instance where ever the relativistic phenomenon is important (by a very small amount though)

[Mythrandir]

Originally posted by TelC@t
The things you have mentioned above are theories, and theories are built on the top of a lot of assumptions.

Just in case you do not know, Einsteins' theory of relativity has failed in every instance where ever the relativistic phenomenon is important (by a very small amount though)

Yes ofcourse these are THEORIES. And usually THEORIES are built upon ASSUMPTIONS. Obviously, that's with everything.

And it's VERY HARD to TEST A THEORY on a PHENOMENON that ages BILLIONS of YEARS and is (several hundreds of) LIGHTYEARS AWAY.

But all the OBSERVATIONS of BLACK HOLES so far appear to VALIDATE what I just SAID.

For example, the black hole in the center of our galaxy APPEARS to have the mass of 3 million suns, which probably happened because it collected mass with collision with stars and gas clouds.


And speaking of the link about quantum teleportation I posted, it isn't just a THEORY because it actually has been done. We have teleported a couple of particles.

Also Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle isn't just a random theory, it has been observed and verified numerous times.

Btw. where did I mention Einstein?

[Troll King]

The best part about theories is that they are open for discussion.

[Mythrandir]

obviously.

The only problem is that everything in physics is a theory, and nothing a law. Every theory is made out of assumptions, but most important, they can be verified, and they can be disproven.

Neither is it strange to use a theory that has been verified over and over as an assumption for a next theory. And sometimes certain theories have been verified for thousands of times, and have never been disproving. At that point it is better to accept them as _facts_. Because otherwise you will end up questioning everything, (and perhaps it's cool because it makes you look smart), but you're leaving no room for any discussion whatsoever.