Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
seeeeahawks

My mind hurts

Hi guys

So..

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Vioh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- 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 :P.

 

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 :P

 

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 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0