wild theories- constellations

Re: wild theories- constellations
Cyracuz

You are wrong. Constellations are made of little diamonds, stacked in black velvet.
Besides, the earth is flat and it floats in a sort of primordial soup. The waves of the soup causes all the motion in the disc of the earth, and that is why you think constellations are moving. No, my friend, that's you that moves, according to the waves of the soup. Didn't you ever read Einstein?
There are scientists that say that the earth is supported by a turtle. Others, like my friend Tales, that all is water. But that point is not relevant since he never liked wine.

What makes me furious are those fellows who claim to live in Australia. There are no mental institutions to take care of them?

Wild theory-Naomi Campbell is apparently one of the most beautiful woman in the world!
Ive seen prettier people working inmy local supermarket!

You cannot be wrong if you say what if. Too bad I didn't say that.

And yes, there is an institution for those who live down under. It's called Australia.

Naomi Campbell you say? I've had prettier women with me in bed.

But she is among the prettiest women in the world since she is a woman, and all women are by definition beautiful.

Here is an interesting theory that postulates pre-determinism, fate, and negates free will. It is a fun to entertain the questions that follow it.

Billions of years from today, man will have evolved as a species that is capable of fine tuning and controlling the Universe to such a fine degree that he will learn that in order to Survive he must act as Creator. As man, struggles to cope with the ever expanding and cooling of the universe into a static void, his realization will be that survival depends on the reversal of this expansion in order to re-start this whole messy affair once again. Man will have to cause the universe's final majestic dance of death as a collapse back in on itself. Ultimately man will restart the engine of the universe through a man-made Big Bang. The ultimate realization is that space will be relegated to a singularity and time will be brought to a stand still. Man being the great manager of calculated risks, will have quantified the probabilities and permutations sufficiently to come to the decision to cause a Big Bang that will result in an exact replica of the last Universe in every single physical and space-time continuum detail. Because man certainly wouldn't want to risk collapsing the Universe into a Big Bang that couldn't support and wouldn't result in the human race and the safest bet is an exact reproduction. Thus the Universe will re-start in the beautiful progression and regression that under this theory has been committed routinely forever.

You're describing the creation of God. The process in wich we are in the middle.

The universe culminates in one being, God. So he "wakes up" as an entity and wonders who he is and where he's from. So he sets this experiment in motion to see if it can produce beings like himself. Unfortunately he has to put so much of himself into the experiment that he forgets all about himself as an entity. When the experiment is complete he remembers, but then he has forgotten the questions. So it happens again and again and again...

Evolution would not work if God did not put himself at its mercy.

I posted my wild theory on Inertia a while ago...

I never got a conclusive answer to it either

I looked at your theory rosborne.



Is this true? A body in motion will stay in motion, as you say, but what causes resistance is other bodies and energies, not acceleration. (Bodies as in matter).

Friction causes a moving object to slow, even stop if there is enough friction. If there is nothing to create friction, then the body will move with unaltered velocity.

When I say "resistance" I'm talking about Inertia; the resistance to a change in the inertial state. I wasn't talking about friction. Maybe this is the same thing which is confusing Stuh on the other thread.

This is where better math skills would come in handy. There are so many ambiguities in English that I find it very difficult to even explain my theory accurately.

Does the curvature become asymetric because of acceleration? Doesn't the symetry just alter as the speed value changes?


But does a body in the first place resist acceleration?

Yes. This is a corrolary to conditions described by General Relativiity.



No. Special Realtivity describes conditions related to constant velocity and tells us that conditions for the constantly moving body must be indistinguishable from a "stationary" body.

Likewise, General Relativity relates acceleration to gravity, and says that conditions for a body in free fall must be indistinguishable from constant velocity or stationary. In order for this to happen, the gravitational fields for interacting bodies in free fall must appear symetrical (from the point of view of each object), and therefor, under acceleration, the field must be asymetrical.



Yes. Due to Inertia.