DAL59

Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical questions

Recommended Posts

There are many fictional examples of humanity, if not the entire universe, as an experiment. Sometimes a failed one, or not the ideal outcome (yet)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 If we are not a simulation, how does the Universe know that the stars should be arranged in patterns depicting our mythological characters, animals, and things?

(so-called "constellations")

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

 If we are not a simulation, how does the Universe know that the stars should be arranged in patterns depicting our mythological characters, animals, and things?

(so-called "constellations")

first of all, the universe does not have a consciousness, so it cannot "know." but even so, the constellations are only so accurate and such. In other words, it took a lot of imagination to see figures in the stars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, <Joseph kerman> said:

first of all, the universe does not have a consciousness, so it cannot "know." but even so, the constellations are only so accurate and such. In other words, it took a lot of imagination to see figures in the stars. 

Do not take @kerbiloid entirely seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should remind the thread title

Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical questions

(So, both question and answer match the thread definition, lol)

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, <Joseph kerman> said:

could there be a 100% water planet

I believe I've read an article about this somewhere recently.  Yes there could but to keep the water from boiling away at the surface (I'm assuming you meant liquid water) the planet would need to be massive enough that the water at the core would be compressed into a form of ice.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, <Joseph kerman> said:

could there be a 100% water planet

As far as I know the closest to an all water body known to science seems to be Gliese 436 b.  I believe any large body of water or ice would have to include some other materials deposited as cosmic dust or meteor/asteroid impacts.

That said there are gas giants with densities lower than water and surface gravity higher than earth so it should be possible, just not probable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 4:21 PM, kerbiloid said:

 If we are not a simulation, how does the Universe know that the stars should be arranged in patterns depicting our mythological characters, animals, and things?

(so-called "constellations")

if serious:

they're not, we made those up due to a phenomenon in our minds called pareidolia (finding patterns where there aren't)

if not:

good bait

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Aperture Science said:

good bait

Not bait, just @kerbiloid's sarcasm at it's strongest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 4:21 PM, kerbiloid said:

 If we are not a simulation, how does the Universe know that the stars should be arranged in patterns depicting our mythological characters, animals, and things? (so-called "constellations")

I find your lack of faith disturbing. Of course, the Constelations were made with our Mythology in mind because the Creator built them that way  - otherwise, how our Mythology would get depicted by the Stars?

The fact that the Creator is running a program called Human Space Program on his Celestial Mainframe doesn't have to mean we are living on a simulation!

Spoiler

(uh… phone is ringing… a moment…. - ok, my psychiatrist called reminding me of my meds. I'll be back soon)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time they reload the Human Space Program with F9, I feel strange. Everything is like the same, but something has kinda changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aperture Science said:

Does the lamp give off light, or does it suck dark?

 

Confusement.

Quote

For years it has been believed that electric bulbs emitted light. However, 
    recent information has proven otherwise. Electric bulbs don't emit light, 
    they suck dark. Thus we call these bulbs dark suckers. The dark sucker 
    theory proves the existence of dark, that dark has mass heavier that that 
    of light, and that dark is faster than light.  

    The basis of the dark sucker theory is that electric bulbs suck dark. Take 
    for example, the dark suckers in the room where you are. There is much 
    less dark right next to them than there is elsewhere. The larger the dark 
    sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark suckers in a parking 
    lot have a muck greater capacity than the ones in this room. As with all 
    things, dark suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of dark, they 
    can no longer suck. This is proven by the black spot on a full dark 
    sucker. A candle is a primitive dark sucker. A new candle has a white 
    wick. You will notice that after the first use, the wick turns black, 
    representing all of the dark which has been sucked into it. If you hold a 
    pencil next to the wick of an operating candle, the tip will turn black 
    because it got in the way of the dark flowing into the candle. 
    Unfortunately, these primitive dark suckers have a very limited range. 
    There are also portable dark suckers. The bulbs in these can't handle all 
    of the dark by themselves, and must be aided by a dark storage unit. When 
    the dark storage unit is full, it must be either emptied or replaced 
    before the portable dark sucker can operate again.  

    Dark has mass. When dark goes into a dark sucker, friction from this mass 
    generates heat. Thus it is not wise to touch an operating dark sucker. 
    Candles present a special problem, as the dark must travel into a solid 
    wick instead of through clear glass. This generates a great amount of 
    heat, Thus it can be very dangerous to touch an operating candle. Dark is 
    also heavier than light. If you swim just below the surface of a lake, you 
    see a lot of light. If you slowly swim deeper and deeper, you notice it 
    getting slowly darker and darker. When you reach a depth of approximately 
    fifty feet, you are in total darkness. This is because the heavier dark 
    sinks to the bottom of the lake and the lighter light floats to the top. 
    The immense power of dark can be utilized to man's advantage. We can 
    collect the dark that has settled to the bottom of lakes and push it 
    through turbines, which generates electricity and helps push the dark to 
    the ocean, where it may be safely stored. Prior to turbines, it was much 
    more difficult to get the dark from the rivers and lakes to the ocean. The 
    Indians recognized this problem, and tried to solve it. When on a river in 
    a canoe travelling in the same direction as the flow of dark, they paddled 
    slowly, so as not to stop the flow of dark; but when they travelled 
    against the flow of dark, they paddled quickly, so as to help push the 
    dark along its way.  

    Finally, we must prove that dark is faster than light. If you were to 
    stand in an illuminated room in front of a closed, dark closet, then 
    slowly open the closet door, you would see the light slowly enter the 
    closet; but since dark is so fast, you would not be able to see the dark 
    leave the closet.  

    In conclusion, I would like to say that dark suckers make all of our lives 
    much easier. So the next time you look at an electric bulb, remember that 
    it is indeed a dark sucker.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this thread.  There used to be a publication called Journal of Irreproducable Results, which would have very good articles  which sounded real.  The best ones were those that you couldn't  find the fallacy it was based on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aperture Science said:

Does the lamp give off light, or does it suck dark?

 

Confusement.

I once tried to posit that there was no heat energy, just cold energy. But that theory didn’t hold water. it just froze it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If available in quantity, would mammoth wool find industrial applications?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DDE said:

If available in quantity, would mammoth wool find industrial applications?

Nah. Too short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DDE said:

If available in quantity, would mammoth wool find industrial applications?

Large fur-bearer is inefficient due to suboptimal surface-area/volume ratio. Sheep are much better suited to wool production, more wool per required unit of animal feed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Large fur-bearer is inefficient due to suboptimal surface-area/volume ratio.

Better than mammoth.

Spoiler

opisanie-homyachki.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How hard and expensive would it be to fill a football stadium with water and have a ship battle?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

How hard and expensive would it be to fill a football stadium with water and have a ship battle?  

Apparently there is a fair amount of support for the idea that the Romans did just that. Id wager it would be very plausible to do it in modern day but that the pervasiveness of fragile electrics/water-damageable materials would make it problematic and expensive.

affa8b02295593a301d103753bdaf04c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google-image-search "indoor sailing" for some interesting images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

How hard and expensive would it be to fill a football stadium with water and have a ship battle? 

Let's break the question in parts:
1) How expensive?
In total probably 5000-10000 slaves and 5-10 proscripted senators.

2) How hard?
Their problem.

P.S.
Just in case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naumachia

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.