questionposter

That's what I originally thought too, but there's something about the modulus that would make it 11, which would set it back to 1 since it exceeded 10 by 1. 10+1 mod 10 =1? Perhaps I'm thinking of a specific setup, too specific,

Well if it's larger than 10 km, I don't think we have enough energy to make it miss, I guess there isn't a direct link I can find, probably because it's a weird phrase to google, but what if we look at a smaller meteor? Let's say there's a 1 foot iron meteor heading for someone's house. Let's say there isn't really any friction: The meteor hits the house causing a ton of damage. Let's say it was broken up into small pieces: With high friction the meteor explodes into many pieces vaporize as a result of the heating from the enormous friction with the atmosphere, and thus the house is not damaged. If the asteroid is large enough, I don't think at this point in our technology that there is anything we can do to make it miss, it's just too much mass, all I can say is that smaller pieces vaporize easier, so if the meteor can be broken into small enough pieces, they will vaporize into the atmosphere, just as a fact. I guess though it might be a problem of if we can actually break it into small enough pieces, but we once had enough weapons to destroy the world 1000 times over, I guess a meteor wouldn't be as much of a problem. I can't calculate the force the meteor would carry since I don't know it's speed, I was thinking more of like 1-3km meteors, but 10 km might be more than sunlight depending on it's speed. If it was stationary and just happened to fall into Earth's orbit, I imagine it would be slower than something flung around the sun. http://www.windows2u...n_at_earth.html "At Earth's distance from the Sun, about 1,368 watts of energy in the form of EM radiation from the Sun fall on an area of one square meter." And earth's surface area is about 5.1×108 square km, multiplied by 1000 = so it's 5.1x10^11 square meters, multiply that by the average of watts and we get about 6.9^14 watts, I'm guessing per second. If there's some conversion of "watts per Newton" though I guess we can test different speeds. I think the ratio between watts and newton meters per second is 1, but we just want newtons.

Well, the pure stuff anyway.

That was fast...

I guess it's close, I was thinking

I think your misunderstanding it: if there's a lot of evidence to support it and no counter-evidence/points, then there's like a 95% chance. If there are equal points to support the claim of the defendant being guilty, then it's 50/50. With god, this is pretty much the case, the only thing that would have a high chance of being wrong are the words of the bible, not necessarily the existence of god. With Obama, I guess it is more than 50/50, but now that I think about it, I don't think he's a terrorist or anything, but I can imagine someone secretly immigrating and a doctor feeling sorry for them and faking a birth certificate, and not even Obama found it out. I don't really think there's anything wrong with that though anyway. He's president already, if he wanted to destroy the US he would have launched nuclear missiles at Russia or something. I guess if a doctor could remember it, that should definitely seal it off, although someone might say he was paid off, which I would then find improbable because that would mean Obama actually has something to hide, which he doesn't seem to have especially if even he thinks he was born in the US.

What language can I speak to say that 1+1=1?

Two guys walk into a restaurant. One says "Can I have a glass of H2O?" and the other one says "I'll have H2O too". After both men receive their drinks and drink them, one of them dies. Why?

How much wood does a wood-chuck chuck?

I'm in a room surrounded with all walls, and nothing else but air and myself with no cloths on or any possessions or stolen or borrowed items. The walls are 2 feet thick steel. How did I escape?

How about that the universe is infinitely large and there is infinite matter? With that in mind, anything we see is purely local.

But that isn't true, we can observe that because of the warping of the fabric of space that that isn't true. In fact, it's never true because wherever your trying to draw a straight line, there is gravity distorting the fabric of space.

Energy can distort the fabric of space, and it does increase the mass of an atom temporarily.

Sunlight, for the most part, is relatively harmless. It's still more energy than some meteor, but it's how the energy is distributed. If the meteor can be broken up into millions of small pieces, then the energy will be the same, but the energy will get transferred via heat and air-friction rather than a sudden kinetic shock that would have enough concentrated force to shatter the crust. Ok, well that would make more sense if it was inside it, I guess if it was inside the shockwave would be carried by the meteor fragments, but there's still a downside: The fragments of the meteor would become radioactive and would introduce radiation into the atmosphere upon entry.

Some species evolve in response to each other. Like with tube worms, only the ones that could harness that bacterium they host happened to survive, and only the bacterium that could get nutrients from that animal happened to survive.

The universe doesn't seem to care about anything, so the point of anything is whatever we decide for ourselves.

I don't know if you saw the huge words "philosophy of time", but I suppose just because time is passing doesn't mean things have to move, but it does allow motion to happen and theoretically different things exist in different 4 dimensional coordinates.

No it's not a new valley, think time-wise.

Ok, well can this these types of things happen in degenerate matter?

Religions are being created all over the world all the time, it's just a matter if they catch on.

Even if a signal was picked up 50 light years outward, it would still take another 50 years to get a response back.

It's clever, but I specifically stated he/she time traveled went backwards in time, not forwards. Your on the right track though. If a ball is traveling two miles per second, and starts at t=0, then at the time coordinate t=0 the ball is no further away from where it started. But, if we go to t=2, the ball is 2 miles way from where it started. Objects are 4-dimensional at least, you need at least 4 coordinates to describe them in the universe. If you try and only use 3 dimensions the universe is static.

I would have if someone had told me earlier, but by the time I thought about it I couldn't edit it anymore.

The answer is whatever whoever decides for themselves. There's no "real" reason for one to do something over the other or not. And besides, why would they desire anyway? It's seems irrational to desire and cause all of this trouble when if you just get rid of desire you don't suffer.

To was to express relativity, not "beauty" as you put it. The mechanism for latching on to such a notion could be a complex involvement with xenophobia, but it still remains that it's possible, and because of that it fits the parameters. There really isn't an actually "mathematical" statistic for the likelihood Obama was actually born in the US unless you calculate the odds of any particular person being born in any particular part of the world, which is kind of slim except for China and India. It's kind of like with God, even if we find it improbable, there's nothing to actually prove how much or that it it is the case either way, so it's technically a 50/50 chance on it's own.