Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

While I think it's wise to have a measure of doubt, it should not be the ultimate limiting or deciding factor in your life. Taking risks is what got mankind where it is today. Find a right balance, don't be marred by inaction (apathy is death!) and don't blunder headlong into action (Not ready are you!)

 

In the words of Obi-Wan Kenobi: "You must do what you think is right, of course."

  • Like 2

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Posted

Why don't corn kernels digest?

Because not every corn kernel gets ground properly during mastication and/or because the digestive track of modern humans isn't long enough to digest the plant fibers of a whole (or even mostly whole) kernels, IIRC.
  • Like 2

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Posted

Why don't corn kernels digest?

 

Because the human intestine, while functional, occasionally gets the urge to brighten up s***.

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Posted

Why don't corn kernels digest?

too much cellulose, something very hard to digest. it's why cows have 4 stomachs.

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Posted

Does light have weight?

 

Electromagnetic radiation (of which visible light is a small subset) considered as a single photon is postulated to have a "rest mass" of zero, because of how rest mass is defined—you can find a "rest frame" for some particles but not for photons as a result of special relativity. Attempts to give a single photon a non-zero mass have some interesting implications such as light no longer actually traveling at the speed of light, etc. It's not possible to prove as far as I know that it is strictly zero because no experimental measure of a zero-magnitude can be taken, but results put the higher limit for its mass at an exceedingly small value.

 

This is compounded by the fact that rest mass is not additive. Individual photons have zero rest mass, but this is not necessarily true for a pair of photons taken together. Also, EM radiation does exhibit a quality that in the macroscopic world is proportional to "mass": momentum. Radiation pressure preventing the gravitational collapse of a star (or blowing it away in a runaway reaction) is a manifestation of this momentum. However the case of a photon, (rest) mass has no bearing on momentum, being a function of wavelength instead.

 

I'm not a physicist so I'm sure somebody around here can provide a more rigorous/complete/easy to understand answer (which I'd appreciate).

 

Now, what is time?

  • Like 1

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Posted

As I understand it Yggdrasil the World Ash, the great tree stretching throughout all the nine worlds, is roughly translated as Terrible One's Horse. My question is who's the Terrible One and why is this tree his horse?

 

Nidhoggr or Corpse Tearer, the Orm tearing at Yggdrasil's roots, does the Nid part of the word bear an etymological connection with Nithling and if so why?

Quite an experience to live in misery isn't it? That's what it is to be married with children.

I've seen things you people can't even imagine. Pearly Kings glittering on the Elephant and Castle, Morris Men dancing 'til the last light of midsummer. I watched Druid fires burning in the ruins of Stonehenge, and Yorkshiremen gurning for prizes. All these things will be lost in time, like alopecia on a skinhead. Time for tiffin.

 

Tea for the teapot!

Posted

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

*not sure if I've used the word affective correctly*

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Posted

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Posted

Tea demands that Time exists, thus it came into being, along with biccy's.

  • Like 2

Quite an experience to live in misery isn't it? That's what it is to be married with children.

I've seen things you people can't even imagine. Pearly Kings glittering on the Elephant and Castle, Morris Men dancing 'til the last light of midsummer. I watched Druid fires burning in the ruins of Stonehenge, and Yorkshiremen gurning for prizes. All these things will be lost in time, like alopecia on a skinhead. Time for tiffin.

 

Tea for the teapot!

Posted

 

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

 

 

How can space and time be the same thing if space allows me to go backward, or forward, but not time? 

All Stop. On Screen.

Posted

you do go forward in time. constantly.

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Posted (edited)

 

 

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

 

 

How can space and time be the same thing if space allows me to go backward, or forward, but not time? 

 

 

 

No, what is not allowed is >1 copies of yourself existing simultaneously. How can you know that you haven't travelled to the "past" if your memory only registers events from... the past?

Edited by 213374U

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Posted

 

 

 

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

 

 

How can space and time be the same thing if space allows me to go backward, or forward, but not time? 

 

 

 

No, what is not allowed is >1 copies of yourself existing simultaneously. How can you know that you haven't travelled to the "past" if your memory only registers events from... the past?

 

But is me from the future the same as me from the past or are they two completely separate entities? Also Slaughterhouse 5

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted

 

 

 

 

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

 

 

How can space and time be the same thing if space allows me to go backward, or forward, but not time? 

 

 

 

No, what is not allowed is >1 copies of yourself existing simultaneously. How can you know that you haven't travelled to the "past" if your memory only registers events from... the past?

 

But is me from the future the same as me from the past or are they two completely separate entities? Also Slaughterhouse 5

 

 

I don't know about this Slaughterhouse 5, but Google indicates it's a novel with time travel themes. Might have to check it out.

 

A notion of different "you" at a different point in "time" only makes sense if you picture time as a linear dimension, in which you have a degree of freedom. Think of yourself at different points in "time" rather as roughly the same entity, with some changes. What is popularly imagined as time travel makes about as much sense as going to the other room while simultaneously remaining exactly where you are before you start moving. The whole experience is still shaped by the way your memory stores a (linear) summary of events and your mind struggles to make sense out of it.

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Posted

 

 

 

 

 

Do you mean affective time in our heads, or time as an absolute function of the universe?

 

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

 

 

How can space and time be the same thing if space allows me to go backward, or forward, but not time? 

 

 

 

No, what is not allowed is >1 copies of yourself existing simultaneously. How can you know that you haven't travelled to the "past" if your memory only registers events from... the past?

 

But is me from the future the same as me from the past or are they two completely separate entities? Also Slaughterhouse 5

 

 

I don't know about this Slaughterhouse 5, but Google indicates it's a novel with time travel themes. Might have to check it out.

 

A notion of different "you" at a different point in "time" only makes sense if you picture time as a linear dimension, in which you have a degree of freedom. Think of yourself at different points in "time" rather as roughly the same entity, with some changes. What is popularly imagined as time travel makes about as much sense as going to the other room while simultaneously remaining exactly where you are before you start moving. The whole experience is still shaped by the way your memory stores a (linear) summary of events and your mind struggles to make sense out of it.

 

You should totally read Slaughterhouse 5 and you will understand why your post is a bit redundant.

  • Like 1
I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted (edited)

Now, what is time?

Time is an intellectual construct to explain causal effects that we view as a result of indirect experience of something that is outside of our natural ability to view as a whole.

 

Any theory, at this time, to explain time exists as a "three blind men describing an elephant" scenario.

Edited by Amentep
  • Like 1

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Posted

Time is indeed a weird thing. It's like some construct added to the universe to bring order, so everything doesn't happen at once.

 

A bit like some math things that can't really be explained, only accepted or understood on an intuitive level.

 

E.g. you can halve the distance between two points an infinite number of times. Yet, that would mean the distance between those two points should be infinitely long, yet it isn't. Some things just doesn't make sense (other than to philosophers, real and self proclaimed, who could probably flame a forum thread to death arguing over semantics and obscure principles).

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
 

Posted (edited)

^the distance between two points being halved being infinite is true. The thing is its irrelevant unless your feet are themselves infinitely small (lim-> inf = 0).

 

There's a limit to how small a distance can be that's relative to size of locomotion as you can only half any distance to a ratio of the size of the feet (or perhaps the motor coordination of the individual to shift their feet micro-distances) in a real-world scenario. In other words if you can't take a .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 foot step, that distance is covered when you do step and the ability to divide infinitely is lost.

 

or something...

Edited by Amentep
  • Like 1

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Posted

All this arguing about gay marriage.

 

Speaking as a bachelor, I observe that marriage involves putting on a smart suit, being charming at people, meticulously planning decorations, and dancing.

 

Marriage is already the gayest thing I do.

  • Like 2

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Posted (edited)

There's a limit to how small a distance can be 

 

 

True, there must be a smallest distance, when objects get closer to each other the gravity goes through the sky, if an object gets infinitely close to an other object the gravity also gets infinitely high, thus creating a black hole. Since I don't create a gazillion black holes with each step (now that would suck) there must be a smallest distance/space. 

According to the string theory - lets see if I can get this one right- strings are the smallest ''objects'' and they vibrate thus creating some space around them creating the smallest distance thats possible between two objects. 

 

Or something like that. 

 

 

 

I'm tired. 

Edited by Woldan

I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet. 
 

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

Why does a banana taste differently when you slice it before eating it?

This question has irked me for quite a while now, banana slices taste much sweeter and more fruity than a banana eaten the old fashioned way, the difference is very noticeable.

It must have something to do with the oxygen interacting with certain chemicals in the banana, but I really don't know. 

Edited by Woldan

I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet. 
 

Posted

maybe the slices are in better contact with your tongue than the outer layer of the banana would be when you chomp on it from the outside?

  • Like 1

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...