balthasar_s wrote:The big problem of ancient times. What does everything stand on? The Earth, of course. But what does the Earth stand on?!
Also, I'm wondering about the green cottonball. I never heard of such a planet. Must have been discovered very recently. Which is is strange if you see how close to Earth it is. How could we not notice it before?
balthasar_s wrote:Also, I'm wondering about the green cottonball. I never heard of such a planet. Must have been discovered very recently. Which is is strange if you see how close to Earth it is. How could we not notice it before?
ech... We were busy with the Hubble Deep Field Survey.
We were looking deeply into a very small patch of the sky.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.
We are all in The Gutter. Some of us see The Gutter. Some of us see The Stars. by mr. Oscar Wilde.
Those that want to Know; Know. Those that do not Know; Don't tell them. They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.
Hmm… what else does she have with her which might help them to survive? The Wheelephant, perhaps?
lmjb1964 wrote:Did Aristotle think there was one point that was the center of the universe?
Yes. That was his conclusion from the combination of “Eearth and water want to fall down.” and “The Earth is a sphere.”
lmjb1964 wrote:I'm afraid I haven't really read much Aristotle.
I got most of my knowledge about him from Wikipedia.
lmjb1964 wrote:I definitely know of people who think they're the center of the universe.
However, according to Einstein's General Relativity, that's a valid point of view. It's just that most calculations get easier when we put something else in the center.
If I consider my head the center of the universe, and I turn it by 180°, the Andromeda Galaxy travels a seaish half-circle around my head. That's a distance of π · 2.5 millions of light years within a second – much faster than light. Also, it takes extreme forces to accelerate and decelerate a whole galaxy within that Time.
However if I carefully write down all equations, everything turns out correctly: Faster-than-light travel is okay, since no information is transferred, and the extreme forces are precisely provided by the inertial forces in the rotating frame, in particular the Coriolis force and the centrifugal force.
It's just easier to calculate when I assume that I am not the center of the universe. But the result is the same.
(For seaish versions, click on the images.)
Same tools involved. Version 1: ISO 200, f10, 1/100s. Version 2: ISO 800, f10, 1/4s. (To be continued. Wait for it.)
Not so long ago I wrote:Also, people might ask now: Why does the universe have one special, central point?
It is confirmed! GLR is reading the OTT! !!!
...oh, wait, it's a phys frame, not a Time frame...
It is confirmed! S&S are reading the OTT! !!!
...actually... that's not surprising at all.
Although it's a little surprising, since it suggests the newest frame was written in the last four-five dips. I would have thought the frames would have been done further in advance than that. But maybe it's just a Coincidence that you both used the exact same words.
And thanks for relinking to the blitzposting video. That is a lot of work to create a blitzpost!
Ok, so I had a whole page of text ready to go, and lost it all due to a rogue keypress1. Recreated some of it, the rest can live on in the random thoughts that keep me awake when I'm trying to sleep at 2pm.
GET ON WITH IT
[Future footnotes will be kept to a minimum, since I've already been sitting here long enough for most of my limbs to fall asleepz]
Anyway, a few months ago, 4np4 ago (26642664), the decree was to be creative. I already had a project planned but wasn't ready to begin, and so promised an IOU. Well, I finally got around to it, so here you go209
This is not
What I promised
It's further down
In the comment
Wait for it
This space intentionally left blank
Hope I did this right
1ICWIDT" (I always wanted to do thatwhat) 11Acronyms can be made out of pretty much anything, and (usually, anyway) interpreted in many many different ways. So why use them? IGPAJTLTTOTFW?hi-hi- yoI can almost guarantee I won't remember what that meant when I read this again later. [Something I'm not 100% proud to admit is the case with some of my superscript pairings...] -yo-(This is a different footnote)srsBut anyway - acronyms get even more confusing when you have to decide what to do with participles and stuffp ORLYNo pun intended 101heh, I said 'dangling'.... oh wait, no I didn't that was supposed to be part of this footnotethat thisdangling anyway"Stuff" is the official term noNot that 7And I just did it again... At least this time I learned to type it in a seperate editor first. I'm still not sure what I hit to wipe the screen (basically just replaced the whole tab with a solid white background, but still thought it was on this page), I've only used this leopard a few timesc1, so not really surprising. one?Honestly I don't remember what was supposed to go here, distressing considering two different superscripts point here. So, if you're still reading this, just make up your own footnote 404Apologies for the simplistic footnotes, but I've been trying to post this for a few days now3, at this point I just want to get it out and then head to bed. I-B-Sleepy. wWhyzed are the exotra letters after that one? www.xyzWhere does the 'x' fit into that? aaaaaaahDisregard the previous footnote, I get it now topSee c1 20newpages? I can never get this stuff right 1190Yeah, I just looked it up, I can't help it. 1228I promise it's not made of eyelashes
Temporal Knight Sir Junction, Lord of the Sawtooth Snap Time flies like a River, sand flies like a Trebuchét
[quote="Febrion"]Ok, so I had a whole page of text ready to go, and lost it all due to a rogue keypress1. Recreated some of it, the rest can live on in the random thoughts that keep me awake when I'm trying to sleep at 2pm. /quote] Sometimes, control-Back or control-Z will recover that which is lost.
But you seem to have given us an enjoyable post in any case.
astrotter wrote:It is not particularly clear to me at this time that we are not overanalyzing this...
Randalspeed thunk, iskinner, and other blitzers! Notes from the before-was improve the after-when. Some Ways to Time
NetWeasel wrote:I want to put that in my sig... BUT I CAN'T!!!!
The phone could be useful, it has a clock in it. But it does not show the correct time.
Your phone sometimes doesn't want to turn on and the only way to make it work again is to pull the battery out and put it back, but this resets the clock. And you don't feel like setting up the clock every time this happens. So the phone is useless as a time source.
But you noticed something else. Something interesting.
That the phone has managed to find a mobile network to log into?
Sorry, got no present present...
Apart from Forum Games, mostly active on the One True Thread. If you need help understanding what's going on there, the xkcd Time Wiki may be useful.
svenman wrote:What was the year again in the story up to then? But I'd assume that the date including the year displayed by the phone is just as useless as the time, for the same reasons.
OK, I blitzed the story up until I found a date. The 23rd of June 2011. (Also, every time I re-blitz I'm reminded how awesomefully funny bsta is.) But thats a very good point, that if the time isn't right on the watch, the date might not be either. What else would be the interesting thing that they found? It does look like they have signal there on the moon, so that is interesting.