Jump to content

darktheorist

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-18 Bad

About darktheorist

  • Rank
    Quark
  1. He's been prophecied about for eons. Since the birth of time, the worlds been casting an eager lookout in the direction of the coming of the antichrist. The maitreyta, as buddhist know him. Hazarat Al Mahdi to muslims. The Kalki to Hindus. Call him what you may... He's here.
  2. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/93134-newtons-apple-the-secret-untold-story/#entry901343 I typed that out, ten minutes later the horrible swasnot looms up to me with a message on a silver salver. Hes LOCKED, for Blessedssaykes, my topic. Now was he right to do what he did? Or should he have excercised the prior courtsey of TELLING ME TO JUST MOVE MY TOPIC TO A DIFFERENT THREAD SECTION? I have no idea what this guy has against me. I secretly suspect he dislikes my skin tone or something like that.
  3. The idea of people reproducing seems to cause no end of shame within the human race. Ive seen Doggie woggies making love in the middle of the street; doesnt it follow scientifically that HUMANS doing the same, in public, would actually be the same act elevated to a higher, more intellectual plane? And therefore perfectly free from embarrasment? And yet on the rare occasion you chance to see two HUMANS having sex in public, its a No. 1 Act Of Public Disgrace. Myes. Its almost as if people suddenly stopped believing they were the superior race Come on, human rights my eye. You cant even ha
  4. ISAAC NEWTON HAD had a had a hard day. He was hardly unprepared for it when it hit him. Bouncing off the left side of his noggin at an angle that could hardly be called scientific, it took two bumps and fell silent. An apple. A great big fat bloody apple, seeming to LEER AT HIM from down there. Newton shuddered. Now, a normal person would have just let the bleedin apple go at that. Not netwon. His great scientific brain began to twitch. Turning his head he looked more closely at the wretched apple, the full force of his scientific glare nearly halving the apple in shock. You, it seemed
  5. Beauty, like almost every other random thingamajig around, is grounded to the teeth in science For instance theres the golden 3.14 that accounts for every twist and turn in the beauty of anything. The closer your measurements align with the Magic Pi, the sexier, generally speaking you are. Bearing this fact in mind, just how appealing, taking every such measurement into account, is the Following Human Face on a scale of 1-10?
  6. What percentage of the population is actually involved in physical labour? less than 0.3%? OKi doki, let THOSE people live, then, AND live as multimillionaires themselves, pocketing a 6 figure package at the end of a hard day's work. Only the middle class-roughly 3-4 billion people- gets wiped out, their jobs being replaced by robots. Most white collar workers' jobs could easily be replaced by articifical intelligence in its varying forms. Still, same thing end of the day- less people, more wealth. ALSO: has it occured to you that should a scenario like the one I suggest play out, the very go
  7. 1% of the world wakes up every morning to rollicking wealth. The other 99%-5 billion people- die a bit more every day as they struggle on with life. Tow pretty straightforward solutions here: 1.carpet Bomb the poor and the unhappy off the face of the earth, send them all to la la land, with the objective of not only finally helping them out of the dreary cycles of their unfruitful lives, but also open up vast new space and resources for the Deserving Remnant one percent. 2.Share all around, even up the wealth gap a bit. A world full of ONLY RICH PEOPLE- PARADISE? When you
  8. People dont seem to realise that they are actually OBJECTS, as opposed to real living organisms. Every person, at the most fundemental level, is a collection-mark me closely here- a collection of responses to a sequence of stimuli Even the tiniest action, voluntary or otherwise, of a human, being comes under that definition. (A Programmed Response to a particular stimulus x 1000000000000) = a human being Responsive Matter, you could call it. No person therefore is REAL; as to be REAL you'd have to be outside your programmed rules. To behave in a way other than what your innate prog
  9. OK, looks like the tiny stream of resistance that met this my bombshell disprovation on the scientific ground has already dried up, and so far, apart from the repeated cries to 'double check' my facts-which i did and found them perfectly in order- and a bit of silly banter here and there in the absence of any real arguments of substance, nothing really worthy of mentions come my way. Ill take the final verdict to be, therefore, that I am CORRECT in my disprovation of einsteins pet theory. Yay me.
  10. Right. We agree on what? THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS INVARIANT. What DONT einstein and I agree on? That in the car analogy, the total speed of the outgoing beam would be that of the car PLUS its own speed. which is where he is wrong. That never happens. Regardless of the forward momentum of the car, the speed of the emitted light beam NEVER goes above 300,000 ms. I genuinely do believe I oughta put this post up around a bit, garner it some attention from Higher Minds in the scientific world. Im pretty sure Ive struck the jackpot here with my disprovation. I dare anybody to disprove what
  11. You dont have to label everything that doesnt make sense to you 'trollish'. I was making a perfectly seriously dissection of the theory of relativity, far, far from trolling. But call it that if it helps pat your level of intelligence on the back and say 'its ok, old boy. hes just trolling'. LOL
  12. But, my good sir, we DO happen to know that the speed of light IS in fact invariant. Wouldnt give a damn about the speed of its source, it would firmly stick to 300,000 ms. Wouldnt change for the queen. and THATS why einstein's theory loops over and touches itself in places that cause it to unravel of its own accord. the distance of ejection would be irelevant, because the ULTIMATE SPEED OF LIGHT is above that of the source! As long as the source's speed is BELOW that of the speed of light, the speed of ejection would, right from the get go, be a firm 300,000 m/s. So even though we talk
  13. when puerile, careless banter is used as a substitude for ice cold factual argument, I begin to 'beam' with pride as I see it as a sign that there arent any that would hold up against my own argument. Thank you for indirectly proving my disprovation right.
  14. Yes, because in the case of a BALL, the balls speed would DEPEND on the speed it was thrown! Where does it get its momentum from? Your THROWING POWER. Your ARM'S POWER has a direct say in how fast the ball goes. No so in the case of LIGHT. Regardless of the light SOURCE, it travels at exactly the same speed. Wether the car were travelling at half the speed of light, or 60 mph, the speed of the beam of light emanating from it would be the same. Totally independent of the light source' speed. Your analogy is wrong because it deals with an object whos forward speed IS DEPENDANT on the forward s
  15. Jesus Christ. Are you for real? He DID say that, only the wording was different: heres EXACTLY what he said "he'd be firing light at the other guy; light, which now travels at the velocity equal to the sum of C (speed of light) and B (the speed of the car)" which is what my statement meant exactly, in different words.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.