seeeeahawks Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 Hi guysSo..Let's think of as many mind-hurting things as we can. Like why the sky is blue (I know why it's blue--don't freakin' chastise me), or my favorite... If humans had a reaction time of zero, then we would react to everything at the exact moment it happened..meaning that technically, time wouldn't pass in relation to our inner clocks, right? What do you think? I literally have a headache from trying to think of this. So...help. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibprincess Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 If someone is traveling at the speed of light, and they're holding a light, and of course that light is moving at the full speed of light, would the person actually be moving at all? Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vioh Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 Let's think of as many mind-hurting things as we can. Like why the sky is blue (I know why it's blue--don't freakin' chastise me), or my favorite... I don't see "why the sky is blue" is mind-hurting at all. It's completely understood by science If humans had a reaction time of zero, then we would react to everything at the exact moment it happened..meaning that technically, time wouldn't pass in relation to our inner clocks, right? What do you think? I literally have a headache from trying to think of this. So...help. First thing: humans do NOT have a reaction time of zero. So basically there's no need to think about this problem at all. Secondly, we can choose when we want to react. For example if something happens, I can choose to react right away, or I can wait till tomorrow to react.... So time would still pass in relation to our clocks If you asked me, I would say that the mind-hurting things would only include the stuff that we don't yet understand by science or some new theoretical ideas (such as the multi-verse, higher dimensions, singularity, quantum gravity, etc, etc...) 1 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vioh Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 (edited) If someone is traveling at the speed of light, and they're holding a light, and of course that light is moving at the full speed of light, would the person actually be moving at all? According to relativity, the person cannot do any experiment to determine whether he's moving or not. Therefore from the person's reference frame, he doesn't move, but all his surrounding would be moving backwards at the speed of light relative to him. And the light that he's holding still moves at the speed of light relative to him, & relative to everybody else in the universe. However, the more important thing is that time stops when you move at the speed of light, so that person cannot even think when he moves at the speed of light Edited December 16, 2014 by Vioh 1 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emilia1320 Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 Surreal numbers are mind-hurting Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeeeahawks Posted December 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 How about zero to the power of zero? Because anything to the power of 0 is one, but 0 to the power of anything is still 0. oo spooky. Jk but seriously it scares me. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianHQ Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Mindblowing fact: Clouds are made of liquid water. And, specially, for the science guy/girl (@Vioh): - What would happen if an unstoppable force hit an immovable object? - How is it possible we learn from history that we do not learn from history? Try to answer those . Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howl Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Opposites are more closely related than anything else because of their relationship through their complete contrast. For example, "up" is more closely related to "down" than "up" is to the mating patterns of tree frogs, or "down" is to calcification. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vioh Posted December 21, 2014 Report Share Posted December 21, 2014 - What would happen if an unstoppable force hit an immovable object? - How is it possible we learn from history that we do not learn from history? Try to answer those . In my opinion, the first question is extremely hypothetical, and ill-defined, so there can be a lot of different answers to it. However, my favourite one is the answer from minutephysics (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eKc5kgPVrA). Watch till the end to see the mind-blowing consequence of the wording of the question. I can't answer the second question. It's not within my field of science Now im gonna contribute a fun scientific fact of my own. Empty space is not actually empty!!! It's a "boiling, bubbling brew of virtual particles that pop in & out of existence in a time scale so short that you can't even measure them" (quote from Lawrence Krauss). This essentially means that most of the mass of your body is not from the particles (e.g. protons, neutrons, & electrons) that you're familiar with, it actually comes from the empty space between these particles. A possible consequence of this scientific fact is that *empty space is not actually nothing*, but it is something. Or maybe it's better for us to redefine our definition of nothing, such that it is something..... hmm, this might make you think Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.