GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   I debunked Albert Einstein while eating ice cream (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=145029)

12clicks 06-19-2003 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
If I am traveling at the speed of light excatly. In my hand I hold a ball. I then throw the ball as hard as I can, would that ball then be going faster than the speed of light?
are you in a vaccum?

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
If I am traveling at the speed of light excatly. In my hand I hold a ball. I then throw the ball as hard as I can, would that ball then be going faster than the speed of light?
really cool :thumbsup
and the answer should be yes

freeadultcontent 06-19-2003 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks


are you in a vaccum?

I dont know. I just know if I can throw a ball at 70mph and I happen to be in a car doing 70 as well. The ball is already traveling at 70mph before I proceed to throw it. Thus when I throw it the ball would be at 140 correct?

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent


I dont know. I just know if I can throw a ball at 70mph and I happen to be in a car doing 70 as well. The ball is already traveling at 70mph before I proceed to throw it. Thus when I throw it the ball would be at 140 correct?

I think so yes, if we discard the resistance of air

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:06 PM

fuck wat an idiot,
u cannot travel the speed of light,
gravity increases to the point that it slows u down,

why do u think they are testing out warping?

warlock667 06-19-2003 09:07 PM

Quote:

I dont know. I just know if I can throw a ball at 70mph and I happen to be in a car doing 70 as well. The ball is already traveling at 70mph before I proceed to throw it. Thus when I throw it the ball would be at 140 correct?
if you clocked it with a radar I bet it would still only clock 70mph. Weird.... :)

12clicks 06-19-2003 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent


I dont know. I just know if I can throw a ball at 70mph and I happen to be in a car doing 70 as well. The ball is already traveling at 70mph before I proceed to throw it. Thus when I throw it the ball would be at 140 correct?

only if you can throw a ball 70 mph but even then, it will rapidly decrease in speed. you continue to travel at the speed of light, the ball has left your hand and inediately slows.

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MetaMan
fuck wat an idiot,
u cannot travel the speed of light,
gravity increases to the point that it slows u down,

why do u think they are testing out warping?

in a vacuum, there is no gravity
whos the idiot now? :thumbsup

12clicks 06-19-2003 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


in a vacuum, there is no gravity
whos the idiot now? :thumbsup

ahh, not true

freeadultcontent 06-19-2003 09:11 PM

Ok so for a brief period before it slows down (air blah blah) it would be traveling at a faster speed than myself.

So if we are doing this at the speed of light, and the ball leaves my hand faster than the speed of light.
Would it just vanish from vision to reappear in my hand. Would it.. umm fuck think I just gave myself a brain hemorage.

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


in a vacuum, there is no gravity
whos the idiot now? :thumbsup

u?
but nice try

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks


ahh, not true

of course its true!
play golf in space, the golf ball will go infinately until it sees an obstacle! no?

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
Ok so for a brief period before it slows down (air blah blah) it would be traveling at a faster speed than myself.

So if we are doing this at the speed of light, and the ball leaves my hand faster than the speed of light.
Would it just vanish from vision to reappear in my hand. Would it.. umm fuck think I just gave myself a brain hemorage.

u cannot travel the speed of light,
gravity increases as u get closer to it.

marsgur 06-19-2003 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by punkworld


Ehm... I believe #1 is flawed. Since you are travelling at the same speed as the light particles, they will not "catch up" with you, and thus will not enter your telescope and your eyes. So, you would need to travel at almost the light speed to achieve a "video", which would be near still, and which would be very weak since your light feed will be very small.
Also, in 4 the "video" would be twice as bright as normal :winkwink:



ok, lets think about it in terms of taking the pictures with the digital (or whatever) camera

in #1 you will be taking a pictures of the same image that is traveling with you with the same speed. so it will be a still frame (frozen)

on the way back (#4) your camera will take pictures that are greater time apart since you are going against the light that is fed to you.

In #1, even though the camera or your eye for that matter will not pick up the light that is traveling with you (it will be black), only because these devices rely on light as the main source of image. What if you use other devices that can catch the light particles that are traveling with you in step #1) so you can get a clear image, it would be still frozen and in step #4 faster the normal.

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


of course its true!
play golf in space, the golf ball will go infinately until it sees an obstacle! no?

yo fool there is gravity is space just low forms of it.

jollyperv 06-19-2003 09:14 PM

I happened to pick up the may issue of scientific american to read on a flight to chicago, the main article was about parallel universes, multiverses, & some REALLY HEAVY shit...I had to take a nap after reading this shit, it was so over my fucking head.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?col...A5809EC5880000

Take some time to read through all 9 pages, you'll feel pretty insignificant & very dumb :)

freeadultcontent 06-19-2003 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


of course its true!
play golf in space, the golf ball will go infinately until it sees an obstacle! no?

That would not be gravity, that would be lack of friction. With no friction there is nothing to slow it down. If the golf ball got to close to a large object its gravity would pull it.

On-top 06-19-2003 09:14 PM

I don't think this proves the sound/light relationship right or wrong, but one time I had the oppurtunity to sit down at Outback with the editor of a book by Richard Gott (who proposed string theory around 1985)...called 'Time Travel in Einstein's Universe .'

He explained time not as your picturing it, but as an additional dimension that we are passing through. We live in a 3 dimensional world, but pass through a 4th dimension (time.)

He gave an example of a stick figure on a peice of paper that lives in a 2 dimensional world, x and y, but doesn't recognize a 3rd dimension that also exists, z. Let's say that paper had the curvature of the earth...and the stick figure ran in on direction on that paper for a long, long time, around the paper...eventually he would appear at the same place he started. He would be clueless as to how he travelled straight in on direction and ended up at his starting place, because he couldn't comprehend the 3rd dimension existed. Supposedly, this is similar to how time interacts with us.

I don't know if this helps prove the Ice Cream theory right or wrong, but had to put in my :2 cents: as I put this Cherry Garcia away...

:winkwink:

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MetaMan

yo fool there is gravity is space just low forms of it.

#1, dont call me an idiot and a fool for having a different opinion than you on a tough subject

#2, if so, then how can the light go @ the speed of light?
you would tell me that light isint affected by gravity? then how come a black hole will bend the light so much that it wont make it to the other side?

marsgur 06-19-2003 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by On-top
I don't think this proves the sound/light relationship right or wrong, but one time I had the oppurtunity to sit down at Outback with the editor of a book by Richard Gott (who proposed string theory around 1985)...called 'Time Travel in Einstein's Universe .'

He explained time not as your picturing it, but as an additional dimension that we are passing through. We live in a 3 dimensional world, but pass through a 4th dimension (time.)

He gave an example of a stick figure on a peice of paper that lives in a 2 dimensional world, x and y, but doesn't recognize a 3rd dimension that also exists, z. Let's say that paper had the curvature of the earth...and the stick figure ran in on direction on that paper for a long, long time, around the paper...eventually he would appear at the same place he started. He would be clueless as to how he travelled straight in on direction and ended up at his starting place, because he couldn't comprehend the 3rd dimension existed. Supposedly, this is similar to how time interacts with us.

I don't know if this helps prove the Ice Cream theory right or wrong, but had to put in my :2 cents: as I put this Cherry Garcia away...

:winkwink:


String theory has nothing to do with time

12clicks 06-19-2003 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by On-top
I don't think this proves the sound/light relationship right or wrong, but one time I had the oppurtunity to sit down at Outback with the editor of a book by Richard Gott (who proposed string theory around 1985)...called 'Time Travel in Einstein's Universe .'

He explained time not as your picturing it, but as an additional dimension that we are passing through. We live in a 3 dimensional world, but pass through a 4th dimension (time.)

He gave an example of a stick figure on a peice of paper that lives in a 2 dimensional world, x and y, but doesn't recognize a 3rd dimension that also exists, z. Let's say that paper had the curvature of the earth...and the stick figure ran in on direction on that paper for a long, long time, around the paper...eventually he would appear at the same place he started. He would be clueless as to how he travelled straight in on direction and ended up at his starting place, because he couldn't comprehend the 3rd dimension existed. Supposedly, this is similar to how time interacts with us.

I don't know if this helps prove the Ice Cream theory right or wrong, but had to put in my :2 cents: as I put this Cherry Garcia away...

:winkwink:

this is just a way of describing why we can't grasp his theory of the 4th denention called time. it does not prove time as a 4th demention. :)
not to be argumentative

marsgur 06-19-2003 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


#1, dont call me an idiot and a fool for having a different opinion than you on a tough subject

#2, if so, then how can the light go @ the speed of light?
you would tell me that light isint affected by gravity? then how come a black hole will bend the light so much that it wont make it to the other side?


you're right light particles have weight and are affected by gravity

the mass of the black holes is so great that light cant escape its gravitational forces...

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


#1, dont call me an idiot and a fool for having a different opinion than you on a tough subject

#2, if so, then how can the light go @ the speed of light?
you would tell me that light isint affected by gravity? then how come a black hole will bend the light so much that it wont make it to the other side?

i didnt call u an idiot i called u a fool, idiot.
:1orglaugh

#1 and its not a diff opinion i dont care u r trying to bash mine with false facts,

#2 gravity only bends light now slows it down

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by marsgur



you're right light particles have weight and are affected by gravity

the mass of the black holes is so great that light cant escape its gravitational forces...

exactly. therefore proving that particles CAN go @ the speed of light, with or without gravity..

remember, gravity doesnt slow down objects traveling horizontaly, it only slows down objects going against gravity
so in this case, its friction that would slow an object down, not gravity

12clicks 06-19-2003 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MetaMan


i didnt call u an idiot i called u a fool, idiot.
:1orglaugh

#1 and its not a diff opinion i dont care u r trying to bash mine with false facts,

#2 gravity only bends light now slows it down

relax dude

On-top 06-19-2003 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by marsgur



String theory has nothing to do with time

Right, but really, it's all related. I honestly just stated that to make it sound cool that I got to hang out with these guys.

:winkwink:

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MetaMan


i didnt call u an idiot i called u a fool, idiot.
:1orglaugh

#1 and its not a diff opinion i dont care u r trying to bash mine with false facts,

#2 gravity only bends light now slows it down

#1 Im not trying to bash you, Im just giving my arguments
#2 if gravity doesnt slow down light, why would it slow down other particles? as you mentionned previousely?

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks

relax dude

i am only having fun,
this is gfy dont take me to seriously on here.
:glugglug

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MetaMan


i am only having fun,
this is gfy dont take me to seriously on here.
:glugglug

I know I dont :thumbsup
its just hard to imagine somebodies reaction behind what he types :winkwink:

FiReC 06-19-2003 09:31 PM

how can light = a form of energy, alter time, which has nothing to do with energy.

maybe it can alter your perception of time.. but not time itself

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:32 PM

150 :thumbsup

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdjuf


#1 Im not trying to bash you, Im just giving my arguments
#2 if gravity doesnt slow down light, why would it slow down other particles? as you mentionned previousely?

#1 im not tryin to bash u either just tryin to get u goin to make good arguments just like u r to me.

#2 lights mass is so small that it doesnt affect it enough, that is why u cant do it, what else on earth ways less than light i have no clue.

marsgur 06-19-2003 09:32 PM

http://www.msnbc.com/news/925846.asp


Good article about black holes and other stuff

Thingies that dont emmit light...

12clicks 06-19-2003 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MetaMan


i am only having fun,
this is gfy dont take me to seriously on here.
:glugglug

now you're going to teach me about GFY?:1orglaugh

buddyjuf 06-19-2003 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FiReC
how can light = a form of energy, alter time, which has nothing to do with engery.
its not about light itself
its about the speed of light :thumbsup

SleazyDream 06-19-2003 09:34 PM

my dog's breath smells like dog biscuits

barryf 06-19-2003 09:34 PM

Where is Steven Hawking when you REALLY need him??? :Graucho

B

MetaMan 06-19-2003 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks


now you're going to teach me about GFY?:1orglaugh

no but i need good feet to process wine.
:1orglaugh

Libertine 06-19-2003 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by marsgur

ok, lets think about it in terms of taking the pictures with the digital (or whatever) camera

in #1 you will be taking a pictures of the same image that is traveling with you with the same speed. so it will be a still frame (frozen)

on the way back (#4) your camera will take pictures that are greater time apart since you are going against the light that is fed to you.

In #1, even though the camera or your eye for that matter will not pick up the light that is traveling with you (it will be black), only because these devices rely on light as the main source of image. What if you use other devices that can catch the light particles that are traveling with you in step #1) so you can get a clear image, it would be still frozen and in step #4 faster the normal.

If you use other devices that can pick up the light particles, they will still need to move with less or more than light speed to pick up the particles. Just like a car can't crash into other cars that are moving around it in exactly the same direction at exactly the same speed :)

Just picking on technicalities though, your main point is right :winkwink:

On-top 06-19-2003 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks

this is just a way of describing why we can't grasp his theory of the 4th denention called time. it does not prove time as a 4th demention. :)
not to be argumentative

Yeah, I see that. Personally, rhythm is my god. I travel through time, at my own pace, everyday. It's a pretty good deal. I'm outta here for tonight...but if you guys start working on a DeLorean, count me in.

:winkwink:

"When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's longer than any hour. That's relativity." - Einstein


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc