Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - EvilToothpaste

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zombie Jesus
« on: April 06, 2010, 11:52:31 AM »
Nah, I've just been checking this thread for the last few years.  That's how much I've missed you!

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zombie Jesus
« on: April 06, 2010, 11:44:26 AM »

3
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Metric and Decimal Time
« on: August 27, 2009, 02:23:19 PM »
Definitely, my favorite measure for time is Fortnight.  Speed: furlong per fortnight.

As for using the duration of a day to define time: isn't the Earth's rotation continuously slowing because of the moon?  That wouldn't work for too long...  of course it has also been shown that the speed of light may have once traveled faster than it does now, so even the current definition of a second could also be changing.

4
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Metric and Decimal Time
« on: August 27, 2009, 08:10:36 AM »
It wouldn't be that big of deal to change it.  If the day was used as the SI base unit of time, it would be defined as 794243384928000 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.  The meter would then be defined as the distance traveled by light in 1/25902068371200 of a day.

Units for velocity, momentum, acceleration, force, energy, power, torque, electric current, voltage, electric field strength, entropy and probably quite a few more that I'm forgetting depend on the base unit of time. If you redefine the base SI unit of time, you need to recalibrate every instrument measuring such a quantity.

Or get a calculator watch!

I'm going to digress slightly here.  Metric system is only marginally easier to use than English.  The only ease of use I have personally used is converting between cc's and litres (much easier in ones head than cu_ft to gallons).  Alright, I take that back: it's MUCH easier to convert between different units using metric.  But there is a problem with SI that Imperial does not have.  Here's a delightful anecdote:

Quote
I was in Montreal years ago, having dinner with a couple of carpenters who were visitin?g from near Paris. They were describing a brilliant technique whereby they had vastly simplified layout for their jobs. Instead of using 1 meter as a standard, one of them said, we use 1.2 meters. That way we hardly ever have to deal with decimal points, as 12 can be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, and itself.

And I said, "You mean, like the foot?"

And I swear, they both slapped their foreheads and made various French exclamations of astonishment. And the most significant thing for me was that they knew that the foot has twelve inches in it. They had just never considered that there might be a logical reason for it. But 1.2 meters, well, that made sense.

We had a very productive discussion that night, getting into the logic behind radical notions like sixteenths and eighths, which allow for useful increments of change, instead of the orders-of-magnitude leaps that the Metric system locks one into. And I told them about an old framing square I had, which was primarily in inches and fractions, but had a little hundredths scale in one corner. The idea here is that one can calculate the constants for things like rafter runs very precisely, in hundredths of an inch, then use a pair of calipers to find the nearest sixteenth or eighth, once the run had been multiplied out to full length. They got it right away, saw how the square makes use of decimals where they are useful for fine-grain tweeziness but lets the operator escape into easier- to-see-and-work-with fractions. And by the way, the 1.2 meters trick might be common in France, for all I know, as I have heard of it from other people. If so, it's a clear case of common sense finding a way to deal with what is only ostensible logic.

5
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: FTL travel?
« on: July 20, 2009, 04:30:22 AM »
Nah, that's not phase speed.

That is phase speed of a relativistic wave, and it is always greater than c when mu /= 0.

And another thing ... you are stating that light travels faster than c when mu > 1?

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What is Life?
« on: July 20, 2009, 03:55:48 AM »
KillaBee, you're a fucking douchebag.  Jesus christ man, relax; this isn't a thesis defense.  But I guess that's your M.O.: just jump on someone else's back when you really have nothing to add.  If you had something to contribute you would have done so in your first post, otherwise you're just trolling.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What is Life?
« on: July 16, 2009, 11:13:20 PM »
but isn't it a little short-sighted to say only one set of chemicals creates something similar to genetics?

8
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: FTL travel?
« on: July 16, 2009, 11:07:51 PM »
I think you are right Optimistic. The phase speed of light ALWAYS travels faster than light when in a medium where mu /= 0.  However, information does not travel at the phase speed, but at the packet (or group) speed, which is ALWAYS slower than or equal to the speed of light.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What is Life?
« on: July 16, 2009, 10:54:27 PM »
I understand your delema. I've talked about this exact thing before and my pantheistic interpretation was ridiculed.  But in all honesty, there is no distinct line between living and not living.  Just as Chris said: what makes one series of chemical reactions living and some other not?

10
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Speed of light and Frequency
« on: July 16, 2009, 10:26:29 PM »

See the top wave has more squiggles in the same amount of length. Doesn't that mean that it travels more distance? That is what my OP was about. Or at least, wouldn't it be accelerating at a different rate? Or am I taking the 'wave' thing too literally?

Trolling fail.

11
The Lounge / Re: Observations
« on: July 16, 2009, 09:32:19 AM »
I knew if no one else, you, Nomad, would get it!

Once I was sitting outside my favorite burrito joint enjoying my favorite chicken fajita burrito with the addition of black beans, corn salsa, sour creme, guac, and cheese.  Across the parking lot was the Grand International Buffet where, to my surprise, a higher than expected fifty percent of people did not have trouble getting into their cars!

12
The Lounge / Observations
« on: July 16, 2009, 09:18:02 AM »
People in a parade are cocky because they think they have attracted an audience.  But really, it's just people waiting to cross the street.  I could attract an audience if I stood in everybodies way.

I was standing by a door when a security guard told me I would have to move; I was blocking a fire exit.  As though if there were a fire I was not going to use it.  If one is flammable with legs one is never blocking a fire exit.

I like an escalator because an escalator can never break down, it can only temporarily become stairs.  There should be no sign that says "escalator temporarily out of order", only a sign that says "escalator temporarily stairs."

My shirt is dry clean only.  Which means it's dirty.

13
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Speed of light and Frequency
« on: July 16, 2009, 08:48:38 AM »
In some medium where mu is greater than zero, the phase speed of light is given by [c2 + u2/k2]1/2 which means that it is always faster than light.

14
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Evolution didn't happen
« on: July 16, 2009, 08:20:07 AM »
Hey Raist, just wondering how many dozens of pages ago your teaching lesson deteriorated into complete buffoonery.

15
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 16, 2009, 08:13:56 AM »
Time travel would have to be more of a jump than a change of direction, I guess.

You mean like applying time dilation between the two ends of a wormhole?

Incidentally, I had an interesting idea regarding this: suppose you had two ends of a wormhole, A and B, with a time difference of t between them - B being the one farther into the future, so that you go from A to B to move forward through time and vice versa. Now, if we place wormhole A inside wormhole B, it will come out of wormhole A at some point in time t before it was placed into wormhole B. That is to say, we can double the time difference between a pair of temporally separated wormhole portals by placing one inside the other.

More generally, we can increase the time difference between two temporally separated wormhole portals t1 apart by passing one of them through another pair of temporally separated portals t2 apart. If we pass both of them through this gate in opposite directions, we can achieve a temporal separation of t1 + 2t2. So, we could obtain a time machine with years in between the two portals by simply flying one portal around the Earth and then effecting repeated applications of this technique, as opposed to the conventional "wait seventy years for a rocket to fly to some faraway place and back at near light speed".

Now all we need to do is invent a wormhole.
You are a wormhole.

16
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 10:35:26 PM »
Steve, You honkey troll mo-fo.

Time travel would have to be more of a jump than a change of direction, I guess.

17
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 05:08:12 PM »
Meh,  small mistakes; you had the idea.

Well I was all embattled because I agree with Raist's idea.  I think I posted something just like that a couple years ago (damn it's been a long time since my FES hayday!).

18
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 03:19:01 PM »
I think it would be sqrt(3) / 2 times the speed of a stationary clock.  Which is 87% of normal speed.

19
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 01:25:38 PM »
Hah, so you guys were arguing the same side and just didn't know it.

I believe it is a matrix operation...?  You might have to refer to your advanced physics class for the special case of four-vectors.  I'm pretty rusty.

20
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 01:14:23 PM »
Hmm, that seems completely nonsensical, circular, and moot to me.

Isn't the speed of time 'c'?  As in, the time component of the four-velocity of an object at rest,

[gamma][speed of light] = [1][speed of light]
I thought the speed of yourself through time is 'c'
the speed of something else through time changes by its relationship to you.
Agreed.  At least, that is the way I understand it.

Thusly, the time-component of four-momentum is [gamma][rest mass][speed of light], which is decidedly not unit equivalent to mass.

21
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 01:00:41 PM »
Hmm, that seems completely nonsensical, circular, and moot to me.

Isn't the speed of time 'c'?  As in, the time component of the four-velocity of an object at rest,

[gamma][speed of light] = [1][speed of light]

22
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dimensions
« on: July 15, 2009, 12:28:53 PM »
Quote
Maybe our time traveling is due to momentum, we can only go in one direction because we are unable to reverse our path.

Temporal momentum would be unit equivalent to mass. And how do you suppose we might obtain a source of temporal thrust without violating the law of conservation of mass-energy?

Last random though. If time is another dimension then shouldn't we be able to measure it in units of length. I always though of time sort of like a flip book. each page being one plank second apart. so what is the distance between the pages. it makes sense to me that all dimensions would have the same minimum length so that one plank meter would be equal to one plank second. so you should be able to convert seconds to meters and vice versa. like I said a random though.

In order to physically measure time with a ruler one would need to be capable of freely moving forward and backward in time.  Just like a 2d being would need to be able to move up and down in the third dimension in order to measure some object that has up/down dimension.

Or as this threads largest troll somehow got right: to get the length of the time-like component of a space-time four-vector, multiply it by 'c'.

23
The Lounge / Re: Admiral Gay
« on: June 07, 2009, 11:24:51 AM »
Tha's good stuff T!  And I may have lied about my return ... I'm not really back.  I have a girlfriend that likes to do stuff now, so I'm out and about all the time.  My last girls name was Boring.

24
The Lounge / Re: Admiral Gay
« on: June 05, 2009, 10:27:15 AM »

Hey Hara.  I think you and I started this site on the same day, at least I like to pretend that is so.  Good times.  What's new in the life?

25
The Lounge / Re: Admiral Gay
« on: June 05, 2009, 08:43:45 AM »
I don't remember you.

Then eat a dick!
FUCK YEAH I REMEMBER YOU.  You still do that sidewalk surfing jazz?

Hells yeah I do!  Though I've been slacking on my h-core downhill shiz.
No computer and no internets for a year? You poor toothy

I'm still in Finland. Not been up to much apart from Finnish classes but they've finished for the summer now.

That was funny homonym action!  Say something in Finnish.

As for the clingers and humpers ... don't wrinkle my pants.

26
« on: June 04, 2009, 02:32:21 PM »
Hey Gaytard!  What have you been up to?  I've been living in the dark ages for the entire year: no computer and no internet.  Now that I'm finally unemployed again I have time to waste.

Where are you these days?

Where is everyone else?

27
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Qu'est-ce que c'est?
« on: June 04, 2009, 01:02:47 PM »
Oh how I have missed the belligerent off-topic arguments from you defensive shut-ins!

It's not a pipe.
It's not a painting of a pipe.
It's not even a digital image on your monitor of a painting of a pipe.
It's electrical connections and neural patterns in your brain.

If we bothered making concepts extreme everything would be reduced to a reiteration of perception, and communication would be incredibly inefficient. I'd most often say it is a pipe because that is the most important aspect I would share with others.

I agree with this fellow.  It's very similar to the ideas of perception in Buddhism:

"First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is."

28
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: If a tree falls in a forest...
« on: May 01, 2009, 08:59:30 AM »
If a stupid question is asked in a forum of morons does it garner a response?

29
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: 13 Things that Don't Make Sense
« on: May 01, 2009, 08:17:04 AM »
You guys are obnoxious.

Everyone knows 40 is the largest number.

And how can you get heat energy out of a reaction that happens at room temp?

30
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Creationist Cosmology
« on: April 30, 2009, 09:23:49 PM »
That's pretty interesting.  I'm not smrt enough to understand where he got that huge line element for an expanding universe, though, so I can't comment on that.  Even if the Earth is "young" that does not mean creationism is correct, though...

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66