Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #522 - WhatIsGwaning (01/10/2013) [-]
I understand some of these
User avatar #524 to #522 - zombiestookmybike (01/10/2013) [-]
stop rubbing your genius in my face.

i'm not smart enough for a level physics :(
User avatar #530 to #524 - WhatIsGwaning (01/10/2013) [-]
Oh sir I'm no genius, I came out with a D
User avatar #532 to #530 - zombiestookmybike (01/10/2013) [-]
i'm no sir

also, better than i could have managed :P i was going to do AS maths then went to a 'taster lesson' thing and didn't understand a word.. so decided maybe not..
User avatar #521 - xxospreyxx (01/10/2013) [-]
Anyone that can roll dubs gets to pic my profile pic for a month.
User avatar #538 to #521 - wartroll (01/10/2013) [-]
**wartroll rolls 88** so close
User avatar #539 to #538 - xxospreyxx (01/10/2013) [-]
yet so right
#551 to #546 - xxospreyxx (01/10/2013) [-]
and so it has been done
and so it has been done
User avatar #525 to #521 - zombiestookmybike (01/10/2013) [-]
**zombiestookmybike rolls 56**
#517 - giumonkeyface (01/10/2013) [-]
E=MC^2 doesn't mean the faster you move the heavier you get, E is not movement it's energy. E=MC^2 actually means the heavier you are, the more energy required to move you. "E=MC^2" equitation only works to calculating movement when the object is light.
#560 to #517 - anonymous (01/10/2013) [-]
shut up faggot you are just trying to be smart when you probably searched it on google
#533 to #517 - anonymous (01/10/2013) [-]
Nope, M doesn't stand for the gravitational mass of the object, but for the relativistic mass, and its a function of its velocity. When your speed increases, you relativistic mass also increases, and so you need more energy to keep accelerating. And there it is limit of the speed of light. Thats why objects with mass can't reach the speed of light, cause they need infinite energy.
It also explains the relationship between mass and energy, as both are 2 "states" of the same thing, mass can be converted to energy and viseversa.
User avatar #584 to #533 - kingarturi (01/11/2013) [-]
so bascially to move the speed of light you have to have no mass or infinite energy. both physically impossible in are universe.
#526 to #517 - sandwitchman **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #516 - shamsher (01/10/2013) [-]
time travel is possible right?
#552 to #516 - fuzdohraa (01/10/2013) [-]
no, not really, you would have to go faster than the speed of light to do that and for that you would need infinate amounts of energy or you would have to get your weight to be less than zero, this is for traveling backwards in time though, i dont know whether forward is possible or not but...
#557 to #552 - anonymous (01/10/2013) [-]
Foward is possible, using the effects of time dilation, as seen in the content
Being T' your time and T the external time. So if you travel at a considerable speed (close to the speed of light) the external time will start to dilate, and maybe 5 seconds of your time could be 1 hour of external time, or so.
This effects are quite real, they are even considered in satellites in which speed are high, not enough to be considered against the speed of light, but as their timing must be very precise time dilation is noticeable.
User avatar #523 to #516 - indeedaleedoo (01/10/2013) [-]
What I read is going forward in time is only possible. Not going back?
#510 - philss (01/10/2013) [-]
is it a good or a bad thing that i know 5 out of these 6?
is it a good or a bad thing that i know 5 out of these 6?
User avatar #508 - rokkarokkaali (01/10/2013) [-]
I'm hoping one day I'll be able to understand what the **** is happening.
#507 - MysticTomatoe (01/10/2013) [-]
my Initials are EMC
User avatar #558 to #507 - pulluspardus (01/10/2013) [-]
My initials are F.A.T.
seriously =[
User avatar #513 to #507 - Awesomecarrot (01/10/2013) [-]
I too and called Electro Moose Cannon
#506 - anonymoose has deleted their comment [-]
#502 - anonymous (01/10/2013) [-]
they can hear, and see what your visually thinking
this is the absolute complete truth!!!!!

The reason a lot of Asians have completely expressionless faces, segregate from everybody else-only associate with Asians and don’t associate with non Asians that much, are very untalkative, and are very unfriendly in general is to avoid accidentally revealing that they can read minds by accidentally showing a facial expression or dirty look when someone thinks, or visually pictures something in their mind they don’t like, find astonishing, or funny etc because those people might see that and really wonder what that was that just happened there and see the connection, and they might accidentally say something similar to what the person was just thinking and going to say. If they all associated with non Asians a lot more then there would be a lot more people around for them to accidentally show facial expressions when those people think things they don’t like etc, so they segregate and only associate with Asians so there won’t be anyone around for them to see that and have any accidents happen in the first place.

Try thinking, best yet visually picturing in your mind something absolutely wild as you possibly can when you are around Asians, and try looking for Asians who give people particular looks, especially dirty looks for what appears to be for completely no reason.

#499 - debukka (01/10/2013) [-]
**debukka rolled a random image posted in comment #2342008 at FJ RPG ** mfw I dont understand all the words cause not english guy
User avatar #490 - lordvatican (01/10/2013) [-]
The first one is correct, however E=mC² Doesn't say anything about velocity, all you can do is direct that from the energy (E)
User avatar #483 - picamix (01/10/2013) [-]
nice but i got to disagree as consider another, larger black hole where to come near to a black hole, for that small moment of time the matter inside the small blackhole will be visible until it enters the larger black hole as it is pulled from the small one
User avatar #488 to #483 - thepalmtoptiger (01/10/2013) [-]
Are you sure about that? I was watching a speech by Neil Degrass Tyson where he stated that the blackholes would suck each other in, and the larger black hole would absorb the smaller one. He said nothing about the contents being sucked out of the small black hole.
User avatar #492 to #488 - picamix (01/10/2013) [-]
im not entirely sure no, its just how i imagine it to happen. most things about the universe are how we imagine them to happen, then we find evidence of it, but i dont know for sure
User avatar #485 to #483 - picamix (01/10/2013) [-]
but yes mathematics was created so we could understand the universe in our own way
User avatar #472 - bbeasty (01/10/2013) [-]
"Information entering the black hole" was disproved. Even Hawking admitted he was wrong about it.
User avatar #480 to #472 - Riukanojutsu ONLINE (01/10/2013) [-]
Darwin said the evolution was wrong on his death bed
the inquisition prove galileo wrong

without source you just sound stupid
#470 - maggnigs (01/10/2013) [-]
The second one isn't always true....
User avatar #468 - fourchaners (01/10/2013) [-]

1015 fav?

fj ppl wants to learn
#467 - fourchaners has deleted their comment [-]
#466 - icewraith has deleted their comment [-]
 Friends (0)