JA2340 16 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Spoil-sport, GN! Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 If the universe is everything, and scientists say that the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Duh!! into everything else! How hard is that? Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Into nothing. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 expanding, into an implosion? GN? Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Nothing. An incredibly difficult concept for the human mind to accept let alone grasp. Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 Ah nothing I've discovered that I started out with nothing and I still have most of it. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 It can turn into something though! Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 Yes nothing is something to hang on to. Link to post Share on other sites
Slippery Jim 65 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 If it wasn't for nothing, I wouldn't have anything at all! Link to post Share on other sites
Metabo Oyaji 71 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 If you're in a vehicle going the speed of light, what happens when you turn on the headlights? I bet you're going so fast you can't reach out to turn them on! What speed you're going would make no difference to whether or not you could reach out your arm. That's to do with acceleration. As you can't accelerate past the speed of light I would assume that you are travelling at a constant velocity, so no acceleration whatsoever thus you'd have absolutely no problem reaching out to turn on the headlights. Of course the whole question is ridiculous as we all know that nothing with a mass of a vehicle can actually attain the speed of light. It could get arbitrarily close with the expenditure of sufficient energy, no? I seem to recall that it was the consideration of this kind of problem -- that is, cars (or more likely, trains, given the era) passing each other at various speeds, and flashing their headlights at each other -- that led Einstein to the Special Theory of Relativity. Couple such thought experiments with the premise that the speed of light is the same for all observers, and I think one is inexorably led to the Lorentz transformation equations. Or so I seem to recall. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 It could get arbitrarily close with the expenditure of sufficient energy, no? I seem to recall that it was the consideration of this kind of problem -- that is, cars (or more likely, trains, given the era) passing each other at various speeds, and flashing their headlights at each other -- that led Einstein to the Special Theory of Relativity. Couple such thought experiments with the premise that the speed of light is the same for all observers, and I think one is inexorably led to the Lorentz transformation equations. Or so I seem to recall. As a thought experiment yes you could get arbitarily close to C with near an infinite amount of energy. Einstein's original thought experiment, which he had when he was 16 and claimed helped him later in forming his Special Relativity theory didn't involve cars, trains or anything like that. He just imagined observing a beam of light whilst travelling at C. Nothing against thought experiments although some of the ones involved in special relativity really did my head in at uni. A mate of mine did a PhD in astrophysics and he actually understands all that stuff no problems at all. When he really goes into detail about some of this stuff he may as well be talking Chinese to me and I did physics up to 3rd year level at uni! Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 22, 2012 Author Share Posted July 22, 2012 If carrots are so good for the eyes, how come I see so many dead rabbits on the highway ? Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 When it rains, why don't sheep shrink? Link to post Share on other sites
1 4 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 They have big wooly coats on. Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I'm watching On Her Majesty's Secret Service now. One of my fave Bonds. However, it always strikes me as odd that Bond does not recognize Blofeld, and the other way around too. After all, they met a few years previously in Japan, as documented in You Only Live Twice. You'd think they would recognize each other after such a big kerfuffle. Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I suppose the fact that they both look very different might have something to do with it. Perhaps they both had cosmetic surgery, though I can't find any confirmation of that. Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 28, 2012 Author Share Posted July 28, 2012 That indeed is a point to ponder Link to post Share on other sites
grungy-gonads 54 Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 However, it always strikes me as odd that Bond does not recognize Blofeld, and the other way around too. After all, they met a few years previously in Japan, as documented in You Only Live Twice. You'd think they would recognize each other after such a big kerfuffle. Ponder no more pie-eater. Bond knows it's Blofeld, it's only Blofeld that takes a while to cotton on. It's Bond's disguise, you see. Becoming an Aussie, wearing glasses and speaking dubbed over does that. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Damn you are right. That must have been the beer talking. OK after pondering for another few seconds..... how come M is much younger when she first meets Bond (as documented in "Goldeneye") than when she first meets him when he is younger as documented in "Casino Royale". Is there some strange space-time-contimuum going on there or something? I don't even know if I explained it well. She recognises him, even though he looks completely different again. Which makes it even more puzzling. And again, no major cosmetic surgery confirmed. Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 (I wish they'd get a new M and not have them in the stories as much. Too much 'Dench M' of late, I say. Unfortunately it looks like there will be a lot more of here in Skyfall). Link to post Share on other sites
@tokyo 14 Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Totally with you on that. Since she came in, she's had way too much to play. It always just seems to be about personal revenge and her disdain for him these days. Get rid. The old M in the background dude was good. Used sparingly. There's rumor she might be killed off in Skyfall actually. Link to post Share on other sites
grungy-gonads 54 Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 That's a real head-scrather, pie-eater. I'm with you on M though. She has had a lot of time in the films since Brosnan really come to think of it. Link to post Share on other sites
hellyer 216 Posted July 28, 2012 Author Share Posted July 28, 2012 Should vegetarians eat animal crackers? Link to post Share on other sites
big-will 7 Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 animal crackers, snowjunky? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts