|
|
|
|
| Phenom | Kingz | Dabatos | TonySelf | Tha Q | Half Breed | Tito | 7th End | RV Radio  |
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
11-18-06, 04:44 PM
|
#1
|
|||||||
|
I'm Talented.Period.
|
Yea...I'm bored and irritated...So, any intelligence on RV...please STEP IN
IP: 40C2 F668
I will PAY you to say something that is:
A) Not stereotypical B) Bigoted C) Flat out moronic D) Dumb as hell WElp please 1 |
|||||||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 04:57 PM
|
#2
|
||||
|
O.wning Y.ou D.aily
|
IP: EC67 A5A3
Penn State beat Michigan State today by a score of 17 to 13....
How much is that worth?
__________________
|
||||
 
|
|
|
11-18-06, 04:58 PM
|
#3
|
|||
|
-BTR-
|
IP: FD80 6DB5
^honestly i dont think thats possible on RV
|
|||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 04:58 PM
|
#4
|
|||
|
-BTR-
|
IP: FD80 6DB5
my comment was directed to Q
|
|||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 05:10 PM
|
#6
|
||||||
|
Middle Weight
|
IP: 9C6A F815
My sig says it all. =P
__________________
 this post brought to you by.. Maleficent |
||||||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 05:12 PM
|
#7
|
|||
|
-BTR-
|
IP: FD80 6DB5
1, 2, 3, 4,............fif!!!!!
Hahahaha.. |
|||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 09:30 PM
|
#8
|
|||
|
Just searching.
|
IP: F210 7603
If the inflation of the universe was reversed so the universe was contracting back into a singularity, would the arrows of time (thermodynamic, entropic, etc.) be reversed so that instead of a glass of milk falling off a table, shards of glass form a cup and the milk crawls in then the entire thing leaps onto a table? And if one was able to escape the universe during the time of contraction into a singularity and then a repeat of the universe in which it expands by whatever means, be it Big Bang or String Theory or any other theory, would you become a god?
|
|||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 09:40 PM
|
#9
|
|||||||
|
Middle Weight
|
IP: 9C6A F815
Quote:
1. If some expanse as the universe contracted back into singularity it will move in such eye-deceiving celerity that such an event wouldnt occur. Assuming the laws of relativity count, and presuming time was relative to physical existence. 2. No, you'd just be a lost soul in the annals of the transpersonal.
__________________
this post brought to you by.. Maleficent |
|||||||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 10:16 PM
|
#10
|
|||
|
IP: F6F5 68F6
Q posts threads no one cares about???
|
|||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 10:26 PM
|
#11
|
|||||
|
Just searching.
|
IP: F210 7603
Quote:
Why would it move so fast? I base my source off: http://www.physics.metu.edu.tr/~fiz.../hawking/h.html But let me re-read and see if I missed something. Quote:
You would be outside of the universe. You don't know what would happen past the restrictive bounds of physics, since apparently something illogical occured at the beginning to create the universe. |
|||||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 11:15 PM
|
#12
|
|||||||
|
Middle Weight
|
IP: 9C6A F815
Quote:
Hah, Hawking. Causality and prohibition of motion are faster than light so if some expanse reverted into singularity we must assume it would be relative to the laudable being that it takes the universes excess potential to deflate it... i think that makes sense.. or Im just pulling stuff out of my ass then.
__________________
this post brought to you by.. Maleficent |
|||||||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 11:23 PM
|
#13
|
|||
|
Just searching.
|
IP: F210 7603
Okay...but what the fuck does that have to do with the rate of contraction? You worded that in a weird way. It would be relative to the laudable being that it takes the universes excess potential? And what was the point of saying 'laudable'? Lmao, are you just throwing out random words or something?
What's the relation of casuality and prohibition of motion being faster than light and the universe contracting, exactly? |
|||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 11:28 PM
|
#14
|
||||||
|
Middle Weight
|
IP: 9C6A F815
i meant to say potential. Laudable came from my subconscious.
I'll come back when Im not so tired. For now you win. lol My attempt at rhetoric failed.
__________________
this post brought to you by.. Maleficent |
||||||
|
|
|
11-18-06, 11:30 PM
|
#15
|
|||
|
Just searching.
|
IP: F210 7603
It was funny how little sense that made. I'm quite sure that causality is not faster than the speed of light. I may be wrong in this case.
|
|||
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
