Moderators: Moderators General, Magistrates, Prelates
SexyTalon wrote:*swoons* I love you, all powerful pseudoidiot!
ShootTheChicken wrote:I can't stop thinking about pseudoidiot's penis.
Koyaanisqatsi wrote:Just, if you were born one day, and the average lifespan of a person is one million years. What would you do?
If a million years was the average lifespan of a human I think most people would already know.Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:Accidentally, along the way, tell someone who shouldn't know, and be locked up in a dungeon/buried alive for several hundred thousand years.
Zarq wrote:I now have a newfound fear of mimes appearing above me. ThanksObamaKewangji!
SurgicalSteel wrote:If a million years was the average lifespan of a human I think most people would already know.Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:Accidentally, along the way, tell someone who shouldn't know, and be locked up in a dungeon/buried alive for several hundred thousand years.
There was? Did I miss an edit?SexyTalon wrote:SurgicalSteel wrote:If a million years was the average lifespan of a human I think most people would already know.Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:Accidentally, along the way, tell someone who shouldn't know, and be locked up in a dungeon/buried alive for several hundred thousand years.
There was also no stated "you don't have to eat/breathe.". So...yeah, buried alive = death.
AvatarIII wrote:I'd become an interstellar explorer.
if people are living until 1,000,000 on average, even with current levels of technology, I think even very-sub-light (<10% of C) interstellar travel would become a major thing. so it takes 80 subjective years to get anywhere interesting? that's the proportional equivalent of about 3 days for us. And you could spend all that time reading, learning, and being an important member of a community, so it's not even like it would be wasted time.
So yeah, that's what I'd do
SexyTalon wrote:Indeed. Those subjective three days require that you basically eat the entire time, and never sleep because you'll starve to death in .2* seconds if you stop eating. Just taking food wouldn't work, you'd have to travel with a farm capable of growing crops without natural sunlight. How long does nuclear power last, again?
*Actually, I'm certain you'd starve to death faster than that. Subjectively.
Sytri wrote:AvatarIII wrote:I'd become an interstellar explorer.
if people are living until 1,000,000 on average, even with current levels of technology, I think even very-sub-light (<10% of C) interstellar travel would become a major thing. so it takes 80 subjective years to get anywhere interesting? that's the proportional equivalent of about 3 days for us. And you could spend all that time reading, learning, and being an important member of a community, so it's not even like it would be wasted time.
So yeah, that's what I'd do
Oh, I like that idea. Although you'd have to build a pretty large ship that could support life for 160+ years, assuming a quick return journey. Thats a lot of food, water and oxygen. Although I suppose with thousands of years you could take time to build and equip it before you set off. You could also get a satellite to stream the world news to you on your travels so you could keep relatively up to date.
Right.. and I was commenting on how your daily nutritional needs to not change, but your lifespan is measured geologically. Relatively speaking, you're constantly eating. Throw away comment meant to bring to mind the mental image of a person devouring food, turning away for a second and promptly keeling over, having starved to death. Nothing more.AvatarIII wrote:I think you misunderstood what I meant by 3 days, or completely misread my post, I meant that 80 years is about the same percentage of 1,000,000 years as 3 days is of a normal human life span. and so, 80 years for someone that will live a million, has the same value as 3 days has to us.
SurgicalSteel wrote:If a million years was the average lifespan of a human I think most people would already know.Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:Accidentally, along the way, tell someone who shouldn't know, and be locked up in a dungeon/buried alive for several hundred thousand years.
SexyTalon wrote:Right.. and I was commenting on how your daily nutritional needs to not change, but your lifespan is measured geologically. Relatively speaking, you're constantly eating. Throw away comment meant to bring to mind the mental image of a person devouring food, turning away for a second and promptly keeling over, having starved to death. Nothing more.AvatarIII wrote:I think you misunderstood what I meant by 3 days, or completely misread my post, I meant that 80 years is about the same percentage of 1,000,000 years as 3 days is of a normal human life span. and so, 80 years for someone that will live a million, has the same value as 3 days has to us.
Sytri wrote:My thought here is when Stephen Hawkins proposed the big bang theory ...
Is.. that like how Halo is a cool guy and doesn't afraid of anything, or how Zelda wears green and has to save princesses?Sytri wrote:....
My thought here is when Stephen Hawkins proposed the big bang theory, ....
Sytri wrote:It would all depend on the way you aged. If you aged quickly then remained at a point and then finished of you million year life by aging quickly to die then the possibility of studying and carrying on new theories could possibly work. But the problem is even when scientists have had a long (realtive to current life span) time to establish their ideas some then stick with these ideas and won't change their opinion even when faced with facts to the contrary.
pyronius wrote:step six: Jump in and out of a lake i believe is a gin and tonic because i believe i'm a lemon
darknut wrote:Jump in and out of a lake i believe is a gin and tonic because i believe i'm a lemon,
reading that made me feel happy
though had i read it three days ago i would have been confused by it
darknut wrote:YAYs, is there some sort of an intiation or is it kept very informal
JesseScottOwen wrote:I'd play through every possible iteration of the game of chess.
yurell wrote:JesseScottOwen wrote:I'd play through every possible iteration of the game of chess.
You wouldn't have anywhere near enough time, I think. Just looking at the first move: you have 20 possible options, they have 20 possible options, and this gives you 400 total combinations for the first move. The second move is just insanely many variations.
Users browsing this forum: Bakstoola, Diadem, Farpappestals, GuetraGma, Hoiliintall, operator[], prdxgzbnku, shealtket, Slageammalymn, SlefBalia, Tebychacy and 10 guests