Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

thegorn

Rank #10571 on Subscribers
thegorn Avatar Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius
Offline
Send mail to thegorn Block thegorn Invite thegorn to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:12/25/2010
Last Login:12/17/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#10946
Highest Content Rank:#1222
Highest Comment Rank:#6749
Content Thumbs: 5951 total,  6529 ,  578
Comment Thumbs: 1450 total,  1822 ,  372
Content Level Progress: 52% (52/100)
Level 159 Content: Faptastic → Level 160 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Comment Level Progress: 13% (13/100)
Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 215 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:7
Content Views:130053
Times Content Favorited:249 times
Total Comments Made:354
FJ Points:7434
Favorite Tags: facebook (2) | Life (2) | tags (2) | the (2)
If you get the new xbox, I feel bad for ya son.
I got 99 problems with the xbox one.

latest user's comments

#54 - nope. The reason that works is that part of it is stationary w…  [+] (13 new replies) 06/20/2013 on Possible? -1
#77 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
The hole thing doesn't have to spin. The outside has to spin. You can make the inside stay stationary.
User avatar #62 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
Why?
User avatar #64 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
imagine a car. the whole car is stationary, including the motor, which spins a bar attached to two wheels. If the motor was also spinning it wouldn't work. It has to spin relatively to something
User avatar #65 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
what if the motor was suspended inside the ball by a bar
User avatar #67 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Yes, if you were able to figure out a way to have a stationary core that could work, but in your example if the ball was spinning it would cause the bar and thus the motor to spin at an equal rate.
User avatar #59 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
So you are telling me that if you put a ball instead of a tyre on that thing it will not move?
User avatar #60 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
unless you have a stationary core.
User avatar #63 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
well it would be relatively stationary ass the mass would tend to be in the bottom.
User avatar #66 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
You're a relatively stationary ass. Look I'll discuss physics with you when you learn to write decipherable sentences in English.
User avatar #70 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
HA That was the best comment I have read in a long time!
#68 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Not being an englishman I think my skill are enough to maintain a conversation.
User avatar #69 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Not for a discussion of mechanical physics. Look I would continue but I have no idea what you were trying to say in comment 63
#78 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
For someone who is trying to be intelligent, you seem to be unable to decipher sentences that are incredibly easy to understand, even if the concept in them happens to be wrong.
#51 - notice how that's not a ******* ball?  [+] (15 new replies) 06/20/2013 on Possible? 0
User avatar #52 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Then put it in a ball instead of a tire. Should work the same.
User avatar #54 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
nope. The reason that works is that part of it is stationary while the rest spins. In a ball the whole thing must spin
#77 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
The hole thing doesn't have to spin. The outside has to spin. You can make the inside stay stationary.
User avatar #62 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
Why?
User avatar #64 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
imagine a car. the whole car is stationary, including the motor, which spins a bar attached to two wheels. If the motor was also spinning it wouldn't work. It has to spin relatively to something
User avatar #65 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
what if the motor was suspended inside the ball by a bar
User avatar #67 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Yes, if you were able to figure out a way to have a stationary core that could work, but in your example if the ball was spinning it would cause the bar and thus the motor to spin at an equal rate.
User avatar #59 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
So you are telling me that if you put a ball instead of a tyre on that thing it will not move?
User avatar #60 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
unless you have a stationary core.
User avatar #63 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
well it would be relatively stationary ass the mass would tend to be in the bottom.
User avatar #66 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
You're a relatively stationary ass. Look I'll discuss physics with you when you learn to write decipherable sentences in English.
User avatar #70 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
HA That was the best comment I have read in a long time!
#68 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Not being an englishman I think my skill are enough to maintain a conversation.
User avatar #69 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Not for a discussion of mechanical physics. Look I would continue but I have no idea what you were trying to say in comment 63
#78 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
For someone who is trying to be intelligent, you seem to be unable to decipher sentences that are incredibly easy to understand, even if the concept in them happens to be wrong.
#49 - yes i see know. But it would be impossible to give a rotating …  [+] (18 new replies) 06/20/2013 on Possible? 0
#76 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
So add that in to the question when you are placing the items. I am sure that if you know how to design a motor and put it into a ball, you can change the items that it is rolling in.
#50 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Thiese things work don't they?
User avatar #51 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
notice how that's not a fucking ball?
User avatar #52 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Then put it in a ball instead of a tire. Should work the same.
User avatar #54 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
nope. The reason that works is that part of it is stationary while the rest spins. In a ball the whole thing must spin
#77 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
The hole thing doesn't have to spin. The outside has to spin. You can make the inside stay stationary.
User avatar #62 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
Why?
User avatar #64 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
imagine a car. the whole car is stationary, including the motor, which spins a bar attached to two wheels. If the motor was also spinning it wouldn't work. It has to spin relatively to something
User avatar #65 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
what if the motor was suspended inside the ball by a bar
User avatar #67 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Yes, if you were able to figure out a way to have a stationary core that could work, but in your example if the ball was spinning it would cause the bar and thus the motor to spin at an equal rate.
User avatar #59 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
So you are telling me that if you put a ball instead of a tyre on that thing it will not move?
User avatar #60 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
unless you have a stationary core.
User avatar #63 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
well it would be relatively stationary ass the mass would tend to be in the bottom.
User avatar #66 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
You're a relatively stationary ass. Look I'll discuss physics with you when you learn to write decipherable sentences in English.
User avatar #70 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
HA That was the best comment I have read in a long time!
#68 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Not being an englishman I think my skill are enough to maintain a conversation.
User avatar #69 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Not for a discussion of mechanical physics. Look I would continue but I have no idea what you were trying to say in comment 63
#78 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
For someone who is trying to be intelligent, you seem to be unable to decipher sentences that are incredibly easy to understand, even if the concept in them happens to be wrong.
#47 - and how the **** do you plan to turn potential en… 06/20/2013 on Possible? 0
#45 - i was refering to: "why everyone is saying only without f…  [+] (21 new replies) 06/20/2013 on Possible? 0
#75 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
Because it may work for one rotation with friction, but it would slow the ball and thus cause the ball to be unable to make it to the point it needs to be.
#48 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
My english is not the best. There were suggestions like no friction, vacuum etc. But what if we put a motor inside?
User avatar #49 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
yes i see know. But it would be impossible to give a rotating ball kinetic energy from an internal motor without altering the trajectory
#76 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
So add that in to the question when you are placing the items. I am sure that if you know how to design a motor and put it into a ball, you can change the items that it is rolling in.
#50 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Thiese things work don't they?
User avatar #51 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
notice how that's not a fucking ball?
User avatar #52 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Then put it in a ball instead of a tire. Should work the same.
User avatar #54 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
nope. The reason that works is that part of it is stationary while the rest spins. In a ball the whole thing must spin
#77 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
The hole thing doesn't have to spin. The outside has to spin. You can make the inside stay stationary.
User avatar #62 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
Why?
User avatar #64 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
imagine a car. the whole car is stationary, including the motor, which spins a bar attached to two wheels. If the motor was also spinning it wouldn't work. It has to spin relatively to something
User avatar #65 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
what if the motor was suspended inside the ball by a bar
User avatar #67 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Yes, if you were able to figure out a way to have a stationary core that could work, but in your example if the ball was spinning it would cause the bar and thus the motor to spin at an equal rate.
User avatar #59 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
So you are telling me that if you put a ball instead of a tyre on that thing it will not move?
User avatar #60 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
unless you have a stationary core.
User avatar #63 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
well it would be relatively stationary ass the mass would tend to be in the bottom.
User avatar #66 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
You're a relatively stationary ass. Look I'll discuss physics with you when you learn to write decipherable sentences in English.
User avatar #70 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
HA That was the best comment I have read in a long time!
#68 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Not being an englishman I think my skill are enough to maintain a conversation.
User avatar #69 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Not for a discussion of mechanical physics. Look I would continue but I have no idea what you were trying to say in comment 63
#78 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
For someone who is trying to be intelligent, you seem to be unable to decipher sentences that are incredibly easy to understand, even if the concept in them happens to be wrong.
#43 - I can't even decipher that sentence, come again?  [+] (27 new replies) 06/20/2013 on Possible? 0
User avatar #72 - herebemonstars (06/20/2013) [-]
Would a gyro Help?
User avatar #73 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
yes, that would be the only way
User avatar #74 - herebemonstars (06/20/2013) [-]
I thought it might
User avatar #44 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
A motor -Something, such as a machine or an engine, that produces or imparts motion.
Inside the ball.
User avatar #47 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
and how the fuck do you plan to turn potential energy from a motor inside a ball into kinetic energy in the ball?
User avatar #45 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
i was refering to: "why everyone is saying only without friction"
#75 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
Because it may work for one rotation with friction, but it would slow the ball and thus cause the ball to be unable to make it to the point it needs to be.
#48 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
My english is not the best. There were suggestions like no friction, vacuum etc. But what if we put a motor inside?
User avatar #49 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
yes i see know. But it would be impossible to give a rotating ball kinetic energy from an internal motor without altering the trajectory
#76 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
So add that in to the question when you are placing the items. I am sure that if you know how to design a motor and put it into a ball, you can change the items that it is rolling in.
#50 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Thiese things work don't they?
User avatar #51 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
notice how that's not a fucking ball?
User avatar #52 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Then put it in a ball instead of a tire. Should work the same.
User avatar #54 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
nope. The reason that works is that part of it is stationary while the rest spins. In a ball the whole thing must spin
#77 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
The hole thing doesn't have to spin. The outside has to spin. You can make the inside stay stationary.
User avatar #62 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
Why?
User avatar #64 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
imagine a car. the whole car is stationary, including the motor, which spins a bar attached to two wheels. If the motor was also spinning it wouldn't work. It has to spin relatively to something
User avatar #65 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
what if the motor was suspended inside the ball by a bar
User avatar #67 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Yes, if you were able to figure out a way to have a stationary core that could work, but in your example if the ball was spinning it would cause the bar and thus the motor to spin at an equal rate.
User avatar #59 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
So you are telling me that if you put a ball instead of a tyre on that thing it will not move?
User avatar #60 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
unless you have a stationary core.
User avatar #63 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
well it would be relatively stationary ass the mass would tend to be in the bottom.
User avatar #66 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
You're a relatively stationary ass. Look I'll discuss physics with you when you learn to write decipherable sentences in English.
User avatar #70 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
HA That was the best comment I have read in a long time!
#68 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Not being an englishman I think my skill are enough to maintain a conversation.
User avatar #69 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Not for a discussion of mechanical physics. Look I would continue but I have no idea what you were trying to say in comment 63
#78 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
For someone who is trying to be intelligent, you seem to be unable to decipher sentences that are incredibly easy to understand, even if the concept in them happens to be wrong.
#40 - If you scroll down everyone is like: without friction, yes. …  [+] (32 new replies) 06/20/2013 on Possible? +2
#80 - kinglev (06/20/2013) [-]
the friction gives it a negative acceleration slowing it down. what keeps it in the loop is acceleration due to gravity and centripetal force. it would still change trajectory and it is possible to have a surface with little or no friction
User avatar #265 - thegorn (06/21/2013) [-]
You misunderstand. When the ball is in contact with the wineglass the wineglass is accelerating the ball, which isn't possible without friction. And gravity and centripetal on a whole through the loop would neither give the ball more or less speed, because they are accelerating it at some points and decelerating it at other points.
#273 - kinglev (06/21/2013) [-]
the friction is counter-productive. it slows it down when it is contact with the glass. yes friction is accelerating the ball. but in the opposite direction of which the ball is moving, therefore slowing it down. If friction were there the ball would eventually lose energy and stop the loop. the acceleration that matters is gravity which deccelerates and accelerates the ball so that it stays in loop
#42 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Why everyone is saying only without friction? If the ball has built in motor?
User avatar #43 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
I can't even decipher that sentence, come again?
User avatar #72 - herebemonstars (06/20/2013) [-]
Would a gyro Help?
User avatar #73 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
yes, that would be the only way
User avatar #74 - herebemonstars (06/20/2013) [-]
I thought it might
User avatar #44 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
A motor -Something, such as a machine or an engine, that produces or imparts motion.
Inside the ball.
User avatar #47 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
and how the fuck do you plan to turn potential energy from a motor inside a ball into kinetic energy in the ball?
User avatar #45 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
i was refering to: "why everyone is saying only without friction"
#75 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
Because it may work for one rotation with friction, but it would slow the ball and thus cause the ball to be unable to make it to the point it needs to be.
#48 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
My english is not the best. There were suggestions like no friction, vacuum etc. But what if we put a motor inside?
User avatar #49 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
yes i see know. But it would be impossible to give a rotating ball kinetic energy from an internal motor without altering the trajectory
#76 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
So add that in to the question when you are placing the items. I am sure that if you know how to design a motor and put it into a ball, you can change the items that it is rolling in.
#50 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Thiese things work don't they?
User avatar #51 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
notice how that's not a fucking ball?
User avatar #52 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Then put it in a ball instead of a tire. Should work the same.
User avatar #54 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
nope. The reason that works is that part of it is stationary while the rest spins. In a ball the whole thing must spin
#77 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
The hole thing doesn't have to spin. The outside has to spin. You can make the inside stay stationary.
User avatar #62 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
Why?
User avatar #64 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
imagine a car. the whole car is stationary, including the motor, which spins a bar attached to two wheels. If the motor was also spinning it wouldn't work. It has to spin relatively to something
User avatar #65 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
what if the motor was suspended inside the ball by a bar
User avatar #67 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Yes, if you were able to figure out a way to have a stationary core that could work, but in your example if the ball was spinning it would cause the bar and thus the motor to spin at an equal rate.
User avatar #59 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
So you are telling me that if you put a ball instead of a tyre on that thing it will not move?
User avatar #60 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
unless you have a stationary core.
User avatar #63 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
well it would be relatively stationary ass the mass would tend to be in the bottom.
User avatar #66 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
You're a relatively stationary ass. Look I'll discuss physics with you when you learn to write decipherable sentences in English.
User avatar #70 - xMCxSkillz (06/20/2013) [-]
HA That was the best comment I have read in a long time!
#68 - SleepingDragon (06/20/2013) [-]
Not being an englishman I think my skill are enough to maintain a conversation.
User avatar #69 - thegorn (06/20/2013) [-]
Not for a discussion of mechanical physics. Look I would continue but I have no idea what you were trying to say in comment 63
#78 - anonymous (06/20/2013) [-]
For someone who is trying to be intelligent, you seem to be unable to decipher sentences that are incredibly easy to understand, even if the concept in them happens to be wrong.
#26 - wormtounge 06/20/2013 on nobody will notice right +1
#43 - No you retard it just goes to the next post 06/20/2013 on Getting real tired of your... 0
#39 - holy ******* ********* that is your age! 06/19/2013 on Guess her age (description) +1
#37 - holy **** i am 27!  [+] (3 new replies) 06/19/2013 on Guess her age (description) 0
User avatar #38 - dapape (06/19/2013) [-]
**dapape rolls 66** rolling my age.
User avatar #39 - thegorn (06/19/2013) [-]
holy fucking shitballs that is your age!
User avatar #40 - dapape (06/19/2013) [-]
Holy shit im 66!

See what i did there?
#36 - **thegorn rolls 27** rolling my age  [+] (12 new replies) 06/19/2013 on Guess her age (description) 0
User avatar #49 - wiickedx (06/19/2013) [-]
**wiickedx rolls 98** I wish I was young.
#43 - gisuar (06/19/2013) [-]
**gisuar rolls 55**
User avatar #41 - Mozzak (06/19/2013) [-]
**Mozzak rolls 44** rolling my age
#42 - Mozzak (06/19/2013) [-]
Holy shit dubs!
#44 - gisuar (06/19/2013) [-]
wtf is going on here
User avatar #45 - Mozzak (06/19/2013) [-]
I guess we're listening to some dubs-step
User avatar #61 - honditar (06/19/2013) [-]
that's not dubstep, it's electro with a little bit of dub...
User avatar #37 - thegorn (06/19/2013) [-]
holy shit i am 27!
User avatar #38 - dapape (06/19/2013) [-]
**dapape rolls 66** rolling my age.
User avatar #39 - thegorn (06/19/2013) [-]
holy fucking shitballs that is your age!
User avatar #40 - dapape (06/19/2013) [-]
Holy shit im 66!

See what i did there?
#35 - My top pick would be: pine cone tea  [+] (1 new reply) 06/19/2013 on Guess her age (description) 0
User avatar #55 - Ragumshnagum (06/19/2013) [-]
That's funny, but not really believable considering she obviously lives in a first world country.
#9 - Holy **** it's Sid  [+] (1 new reply) 06/18/2013 on Always have 2 chairs with you -26
#10 - anonymous (06/18/2013) [-]
you try too much, don't you
#12 - I bet you're an american 06/17/2013 on Most terrifying want -4
#6 - Yes, I'm certain people were going to find it hard to find &qu… 06/16/2013 on Double Standards -2
#7 - Comment deleted 06/16/2013 on Cody Simpson 0
#46 - What makes you think kids aren't gonna by this game as well?  [+] (1 new reply) 06/12/2013 on Battlefront 3 0
User avatar #47 - retributionthepimp (06/12/2013) [-]
because theyll be busy with cod ghosts or cod mummies or whatever next thing cod comes up with
#17 - your* 06/05/2013 on Sleep +1
#42 - The best, son. The best.  [+] (1 new reply) 06/03/2013 on That bad boy +23
User avatar #44 - konatalover (06/03/2013) [-]
buscaminas right?
#900 - **thegorn rolls 22** 06/02/2013 on I like rolling its fun 0
#899 - **thegorn rolls 81**  [+] (1 new reply) 06/02/2013 on I like rolling its fun 0
User avatar #900 - thegorn (06/02/2013) [-]
**thegorn rolls 22**
#577 - Bob ************* Ross 05/08/2013 on I was a nigger in my past life +1
#22 - Berrypicker as **** . 04/23/2013 on This Guy +4
#107 - Like the EU?  [+] (3 new replies) 04/23/2013 on Layman Terms 0
#111 - angelusprimus (04/23/2013) [-]
Nah, EU is a bureaucratic nightmare. Its an union of small petty empires all pushing for advantage through central, restrictive bureaucracy. All of them too large to run efficiently in the first place.
Whats needed is a weak union, with almost no bureaucracy, running only basic things. Strong small local government dealing with everything on local level, small population with vested interest to keep local government in check and ability of people to vote on their feet and leave places if they are shitty run.
User avatar #122 - reginleif (04/23/2013) [-]
We already tried that, the confederate system was a huge failure. The Federal government is simply more efficient, and well run states would undoubtedly put restrictions on immigration....they may as well be different countries.
#123 - angelusprimus (04/23/2013) [-]
no it was never attempted. Not even close.
City states, not states as now, because each state with spread out territory is a mini empire. Efficiency of central governments is horrible, because bureaucracy grows to incredible size and then expands to meets demands of expanding bureaucracy.
You govern on a small scale to deal with problems on local level thus directly responsible to the voter and use modern transport and communication to keep economy on massive scale.
System more similar to old swiss confederacy, then modern empire democracy.
And btw, Confederate states of USA were confederacy in name only. By their constitution and de facto centralist government they were a federation.

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)