this idea allows the supposed victim to enact a punishment much greater than the crime, with no trial, and destroying evidence in the process.
genius!
Re:Black holes must be flat dishes
on
Non-Spherical Stars
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The arguement fails for the same reason black holes are called black. Once the anything is inside the event horizon, it's impossible for it to stop falling inwards, no matter how fast it is moving. So no matter how fast it spins, it will collapse to a point (in theory).
And I'm sure you know this, but they are not required to release all of their source code, only the code for gpl parts of tivo. Just because the OS is linux doesn't mean they have to release code for everything running on it.
Yeah only with the scale of the earth and the probe it would be more like sticking a microscopic needle into a redwood tree, the chance of it splitting is near enough to 0 that it can be ignored.
Their survival isn't all that interesting, they were in sealed containers in a locker and the containers survived the crash. If they survived the fall outside of their containers, then that would be impressive.
actually you're both wrong, all of the lines are 1 unit across. What appears to be a thick line in a barcode is 2 or more lines of the same color next to each other. And wether black is 1 or white is one is irrelevant, the system is designed so that each number has 2 codes, and the logical NOT operation converts from 1 code to the other. if you invert the colors on the numeric part of a barcode it will read the same.
Not true, the number 6 is actually 1010000, 7 lines just like every other digit in a bar code. not one of the supposed 6's in the barcode is actually a 6, just a subset of one.
The number 6 corresponds to 7 lines, just like every other number in a barcode. The 666 barcode thing is complete bullshit. Learn about what you're talking about before spreading misinformation.
These 2 statements don't really make sense together... if neutrinos have mass, then they ARE a large component of dark matter. We already know that neutrinos are out there in huge quantities, if they have even a tiny bit of mass it would account for much of the gravity we're seeing from unknown sources (pretty much the definition of dark matter).
totally knock the moon off it's orbit? They're dropping a couple hundred pounds of dead weight (no explosives) into the surface, your fat ass getting out of bed in the morning affects the earth's orbit more than this will affect the moon's.
That's true, but even a multiverse of that type can't have a universe within it that has laws that preclude the existance of a multiverse (obviously). Even in this type of multiverse with variable laws of physics between universes, there are still impossible universes that won't exist. The thing to remember still is that every *possible* combination will happen, not every imaginable one. Therefore the original poster's idea of a universe appearing in a multiverse with laws of physics that deny the possibility of a multiverse makes no sense, it's obviously not one of the possibilities if the multiverse exists in the first place.
The flaw in your argument is what you consider "all possible realities" isn't what the people theorizing about the multiverse consider "all possible realities". All possible realities simply means all things that could happen based on the laws of physics. If the laws of physics include multiverses, then a universe "where a multiverse cannot exist" isn't a possible reality. You simple need to realize that "all possible realities" doesn't mean "all imaginable realities".
Because, it says "every possible permutation", what if travelling to another universe isn't possible? Just because there are (possibly) an infinite number of universes, doesn't mean that the laws of physics are different in each one. In fact it's arguable that with the type 1 multiverse, where it's a single infinite universe that is separated only by the fact that things are too far apart for light to have traveled between them since the beginning of time, the laws of physics must be the same in all "universes".
The keyword here is "possibility". What if it isn't possible to visit another universe? Then even with an infinite number of universes, you'd never meet your double.
This isn't a patent on cookies, this is a patent on load balancers detecting cookies and using them to keep a session associated with a specific server in the load ballanced pool.
Physical contact with cold matter isn't the only way to cool down. Heat is also radiated away as EM energy, for example infrared from your body and visible light from red hot objects.
Not a "fact", but it's the most consistant theory with EVERYTHING we've observed so far. Can you show me an example of something that doesn't fit into the theory?
Back to the balloon analogy. If you imagine the surface of the balloon as a 2d universe, and the balloon is expanding, then a) there is no center from the point of view of one of the 2d inhabitants of the universe b) there is no edge c) the farther apart two points are on the surface, the faster they receed from each other d) if they are far enough apart there hasn't been enough time for light to get from 1 to another, hense the "edges of the OBSERVABLE universe" e) if it were possible to travel faster than light (time travely theories aside) then you could go in a straight line and end up where you started. have to go faster than light to outrun the expansion though, so this is unlikely to ever happen.
Now all you have to do is try to imagine *3* dimensions wrapped around a point (a 4d balloon with a 3d surface) and you have what we've observed of our universe. No center, no edges, everything moving away from everything else at the same speed proportional to the distance apart, etc.
Yes, but atoms and molecules aren't "glued" to specific points in spacetime, they can move freely. Spacetime will expand right under them without exerting enough force on them to overcome any of the internal forces that hold them together. It is only on HUGE scales that the expansion is noticable, not because it is pulling apart individual structures, but simply because the amount of free space between them is expanding. The expansion is so tiny even on the scale of a whole galaxy that it's not enough to even come close to countering the gravity holding the galaxy together.
Nope, any attempt to counter an insane hypothesis will just be seen by conspiracy theorists as an attempt to cover up the truth. And not trying to counter it of course means it's true and you don't have a way to prove otherwise. That's the problem with conspiracy nuts.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think angles can dance, did you mean angels?
With liquid nitrogen I'd be more worried about breakage.
this idea allows the supposed victim to enact a punishment much greater than the crime, with no trial, and destroying evidence in the process.
genius!
The arguement fails for the same reason black holes are called black. Once the anything is inside the event horizon, it's impossible for it to stop falling inwards, no matter how fast it is moving. So no matter how fast it spins, it will collapse to a point (in theory).
enforcing the GPL is higher priority, letting companies ignore it would set a very bad precident.
And I'm sure you know this, but they are not required to release all of their source code, only the code for gpl parts of tivo. Just because the OS is linux doesn't mean they have to release code for everything running on it.
Yeah only with the scale of the earth and the probe it would be more like sticking a microscopic needle into a redwood tree, the chance of it splitting is near enough to 0 that it can be ignored.
Their survival isn't all that interesting, they were in sealed containers in a locker and the containers survived the crash. If they survived the fall outside of their containers, then that would be impressive.
actually you're both wrong, all of the lines are 1 unit across. What appears to be a thick line in a barcode is 2 or more lines of the same color next to each other. And wether black is 1 or white is one is irrelevant, the system is designed so that each number has 2 codes, and the logical NOT operation converts from 1 code to the other. if you invert the colors on the numeric part of a barcode it will read the same.
Not true, the number 6 is actually 1010000, 7 lines just like every other digit in a bar code. not one of the supposed 6's in the barcode is actually a 6, just a subset of one.
The number 6 corresponds to 7 lines, just like every other number in a barcode. The 666 barcode thing is complete bullshit. Learn about what you're talking about before spreading misinformation.
>neutrinos have mass
>neutrinos are not dark matter
These 2 statements don't really make sense together... if neutrinos have mass, then they ARE a large component of dark matter. We already know that neutrinos are out there in huge quantities, if they have even a tiny bit of mass it would account for much of the gravity we're seeing from unknown sources (pretty much the definition of dark matter).
totally knock the moon off it's orbit? They're dropping a couple hundred pounds of dead weight (no explosives) into the surface, your fat ass getting out of bed in the morning affects the earth's orbit more than this will affect the moon's.
That's true, but even a multiverse of that type can't have a universe within it that has laws that preclude the existance of a multiverse (obviously). Even in this type of multiverse with variable laws of physics between universes, there are still impossible universes that won't exist. The thing to remember still is that every *possible* combination will happen, not every imaginable one. Therefore the original poster's idea of a universe appearing in a multiverse with laws of physics that deny the possibility of a multiverse makes no sense, it's obviously not one of the possibilities if the multiverse exists in the first place.
The flaw in your argument is what you consider "all possible realities" isn't what the people theorizing about the multiverse consider "all possible realities". All possible realities simply means all things that could happen based on the laws of physics. If the laws of physics include multiverses, then a universe "where a multiverse cannot exist" isn't a possible reality. You simple need to realize that "all possible realities" doesn't mean "all imaginable realities".
Because, it says "every possible permutation", what if travelling to another universe isn't possible? Just because there are (possibly) an infinite number of universes, doesn't mean that the laws of physics are different in each one. In fact it's arguable that with the type 1 multiverse, where it's a single infinite universe that is separated only by the fact that things are too far apart for light to have traveled between them since the beginning of time, the laws of physics must be the same in all "universes".
The keyword here is "possibility". What if it isn't possible to visit another universe? Then even with an infinite number of universes, you'd never meet your double.
This isn't a patent on cookies, this is a patent on load balancers detecting cookies and using them to keep a session associated with a specific server in the load ballanced pool.
I don't see the problem, when your atm card is used you don't want the bank to know it's you?
I'm confused.
Physical contact with cold matter isn't the only way to cool down. Heat is also radiated away as EM energy, for example infrared from your body and visible light from red hot objects.
Not a "fact", but it's the most consistant theory with EVERYTHING we've observed so far. Can you show me an example of something that doesn't fit into the theory?
You're right, if you can't understand it, it can't be true!
And while we're at it, refridgerators are a myth! How could something be colder than the room around it!
Back to the balloon analogy. If you imagine the surface of the balloon as a 2d universe, and the balloon is expanding, then
a) there is no center from the point of view of one of the 2d inhabitants of the universe
b) there is no edge
c) the farther apart two points are on the surface, the faster they receed from each other
d) if they are far enough apart there hasn't been enough time for light to get from 1 to another, hense the "edges of the OBSERVABLE universe"
e) if it were possible to travel faster than light (time travely theories aside) then you could go in a straight line and end up where you started. have to go faster than light to outrun the expansion though, so this is unlikely to ever happen.
Now all you have to do is try to imagine *3* dimensions wrapped around a point (a 4d balloon with a 3d surface) and you have what we've observed of our universe. No center, no edges, everything moving away from everything else at the same speed proportional to the distance apart, etc.
Get it?
Yes, but atoms and molecules aren't "glued" to specific points in spacetime, they can move freely. Spacetime will expand right under them without exerting enough force on them to overcome any of the internal forces that hold them together. It is only on HUGE scales that the expansion is noticable, not because it is pulling apart individual structures, but simply because the amount of free space between them is expanding. The expansion is so tiny even on the scale of a whole galaxy that it's not enough to even come close to countering the gravity holding the galaxy together.
Nope, any attempt to counter an insane hypothesis will just be seen by conspiracy theorists as an attempt to cover up the truth. And not trying to counter it of course means it's true and you don't have a way to prove otherwise. That's the problem with conspiracy nuts.