Time travel thread, Hey ho let's go!

(OK, so this is definitely not anything to do with being a drama queen, but it absolutely needs reposting every once in a while to lighten up an otherwise crap thread. It's still one of the funniest thread sequences ever.)

It wasn't a crap thread until a couple people decided to lay a big turd of an argument in the middle of it.

who'd kill hitler?

..hmm

What do you know about anything?

Bet you don't even ride a bike.

who'd kill hitler?

What? And destroy so many internet threads?

'slain where's that level 10 pic you used to post?

I have no idea what you're taling about... BTW You still owe me for that sweet stem I sold you so cheaply... Reported...

Right, so gravity doesnt exist and magnets can fly faster than non magnets?

What would you accept as evidence against this idea ?

you find it, then we'll discuss it, that seems to be what you want me to do.

phew that was close

Reppoed!

I have no idea what you're taling about... BTW You still owe me for that sweet stem I sold you so cheaply... Reported...

i gave you the money on saturday in the pub. don't you remember?

Occam's razor would dictate that actually it's because the drill bit is not a uniform cylinder.

it's got chuff all to do with the drill bit...

take the drill bit out...

and occams razor..would suggest that out of thousands and thousands of sightings from credible witnesses...

the most sensible answer would be that ufo's exist.

Right, so gravity doesnt exist and magnets can fly faster than non magnets?

I think the Wingedangel is saying that the effect we call gravity is actually magnetism, rather than saying it does not exist.

It would suggest, as mashton alluded to, that a magnet and a piece of identical (but non-magnetic) metal would fall at different speeds if dropped from a tower.

i didn't 'slain. i still owez you.

if i could go back in time i wouldn't have posted that last comment, and i'd have let the "confused in the pub" theme drift on for a bit longer.

Whats the tallest building in London? this argument needs an experiment.

if i could go back in time i wouldn't have posted that last comment, and i'd have let the "confused in the pub" theme drift on for a bit longer.

Just like the post requesting pics of me naked.

naked wasn't the turn on. it was crying. i want tears.

naked wasn't the turn on. it was crying. i want tears.

As I said before, "creepy".

cranking.

I think the Wingedangel is saying that the effect we call gravity is actually magnetism, rather than saying it does not exist.

It would suggest, as mashton alluded to, that a magnet and a piece of identical (but non-magnetic) metal would fall at different speeds if dropped from a tower.

No,..I said that actually gravity (or the standard account of gravity, which is that a body spins and therefore 'produces' 'gravity'...is secondary or a by product of the earth spinning, the earth is spinning because it has two opposing poles, and as they are equal to each other, although they fluctuate this in itself causes the spin...not 'gravity'...

if you were to produce 'something' akin to a magnet...however not as simple as a household magnet (because the earths field fluctuates, so you would need to be able to change its frequency) that was in tune with the earth...ie 440hz...you would be able to make it fall slower...as it would be able to repel the field...

I think the Wingedangel is saying that the effect we call gravity is actually magnetism, rather than saying it does not exist.

It would suggest, as mashton alluded to, that a magnet and a piece of identical (but non-magnetic) metal would fall at different speeds if dropped from a tower.

Ah, but what would happen if you attached switched-on cordless electric drills to them then dropped them from the leaning tower of Pisa? I think we should be told...

• Puts Lamo on ignore*
  

If you move forward in time have you not sent the rest of the universe (everything except for the object moving forward in time) back in time (relative to you) as there is not exo-universal time reference that the two positions can be measured against.

(google 'twins paradox' for better explanations, but below i my attempt:)

Ignoring gravity (because i don't know much about general relativity), then although there isn't any unique absolute time reference frame, there are an infinite number of consistent time reference frames corresponding to all possible velocities less than the speed of light, any of which could be used to measure the time difference between any two events. Although different frames wouldn't agree on exactly how much time passed between the events, they would all agree on whether you can get from one event to the other at the speed of light or slower (i.e. whether the interval between the events is 'timelike' or 'spacelike') and if you can (the interval is timelike) they'd all agree which event happened first. (If the interval is spacelike, then different reference frames can see the events in either order or simultaneous.)

The idea behind one-way time-travel to the future is, given two events separated by a timelike interval, there are lots of courses (sequences of motion) that could be taken to get from the first to the second, and you can calculate how much time elapses along each course by cutting the course into segments each moving along at a constant velocity, measuring the time that elapses during that segment in the reference frame that's moving along at the same velocity, and adding up all the bits. If you do this you find that most time elapses on the course that goes directly from the first event to the second at a constant velocity. The results for all other possible courses are smaller, and in the extreme case of courses made up entirely of segments of motion at the speed of light, no time passes at all between the two events. In special relativity, a straight line is the longest 'distance' (time) between two points.

So basically, there is no going back, only going forwards slower or faster.

Sorry. I'm aware that this is a rather lame re-hash of things i've seen explained much better elsewhere. I'm much better at explaining this face to face with diagrams.

Ie: if you wanted to send something back in time, you need only (and I use 'only' in a purely hypothetical sense!) send everything except for the object forward in time.

?

If you could send everything else forwards, you still wouldn't actually be able to go back, but you could effectively slot 'extra' time into your life - if you arrive at a deadline with 10 hours of work still to do, you could send everything else 10 hours into the future, spend 10 hours working, and still meet the deadline as the deadline is defined relative to everything else's view.

you find it, then we'll discuss it, that seems to be what you want me to do.

I see.

When asked to support your own claims with evidence you refuse to do so.

You then ask others to find evidence that disproves your claim.

And then when people ask you what you would accept as evidence against the claim you refuse to say.

Even without picking up on mashton's (very valid) point about why the onus is on the proponent of a claim to prove it rather than on your audience to disprove it - we seemed to have moved into an entirely new area of enquiry here.

it's got chuff all to do with the drill bit...

take the drill bit out...

and occams razor..would suggest that out of thousands and thousands of sightings from credible witnesses...

the most sensible answer would be that ufo's exist.

Even without the drill bit are you telling me the parts in a drill spinning at 1,000+ rpm are completely evenly weighted?

Great alias....

Two Spoks.