ohcanada_00

If a ricer's honda dies on the freeway and everyone can see....does anyone still care?

Brent_23M

is it on the shoulder? ^^^

hammy

only the tow truck operator and his boss. - in ref to honduh question

RedneckwithanxB

if the lens of our eye flips the light coming into our eye, then are we living in an upside down world?

sorry, something that has always bothered me since middle school science

surfcity40

that's because it was middle school science and you still buy that explanation. you are the light.

RedneckwithanxB

how can i be the light if i am looking at the light

RoswellScion

Here's another one....

If you are sitting there, looking in a mirror, trying to decide which side to put something on...such as an armband, which way the bill of your hat faces, etc... and you figure out it looks good on your right side while looking in the mirror, then why don't you put it on your left arm to achieve the image in the mirror?

If you all remember the movie "Clueless," or ever had a sister that made you watch it numerous times, they did Polaroids...makes sense eh?

Tomas

Mirrors have been a problem for me since I was a mere child...

Since a mirror reverses left and right, why doesn't it reverse top and bottom???

That's bothered me since about 1949...

SciFly

because the lens of your eye re-inverts the image?

no, that's not right.

=thanks a lot, Tom, for -ruining- my peace of mind for the rest of my dim, inverted life= rats!

SciFly

Here's a question to annoy people as it has annoyed me since I was five years old, staring at the tricycle's front wheel as it slowly turned:

Q: is the motion continuous,
or is it definable as
infinitesimally small starts and stops?

At five I could not pose the question,
but that is what my question was then, and is now.

Tomas

Ah! Zeno's paradox, Reid!

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paradox-zeno/

It's all descrete motions that prove that no motion is possible!

Rabid_Lemming

But what if the mutation that leads to chickens happens to an embryo? The precursor to chickens could have been egg laying animals to begin with (lizards) right? So lets say that over a period of x years, a particular species of lizard has been evolving and mutating. The genetic drift is not far enough apart to exclude the mutated form from further breeding, however, the various DNA tags that have been skewed are carried on to the offspring. Given enough generations, you may eventually end up with a pseudo-chicken that is not a chicken. However with a little bit more mutation, the next generation in the egg are what we know today to be chickens. Possible right?

xlr8tC

it's not possible. not even a little bit. a microscopic organism doesn't create eggs. it has to evolve to create eggs. so, for the sake of arguement, lets say the chicken was a salamander looking thing first. created eggs and then became a chicken. sure, the eggs exist, but the chicken egg doesn't exist till the chicken lays one. till then, it was a salamander-chicken hybrid egg. makes sense, right.

also. mirrors are reflections. do a line diagram and you'll see why(though i think you know why) everything is reversed left to right and not up and down.

and the tricycle thing.... violates the laws of motion. the same laws that keep spacecraft afloat in orbit, and cars driving. it is an interesting posit though. i'm not saying that the laws are perfectly right, but to have everything starting and stopping would require a lot of extra energy that doesn't seem to appear or disappear. do you think you could come up with a way to test it?

Rabid_Lemming

Ahhh I see your point. It's not called a chicken egg until a chicken is the one that has laid it. Got it. But, I do think that an egg could contain a chicken prior to being laid by a chicken as per my previous argument. But you are correct, it wouldn't be a chicken egg until the next gen laid by the first chicken.

SciFly

Hi xlr8tC and Tom.

Thanks for the ideas.
xlr8tC, what you said makes finest, modern sense.
The Greeks could not know about states of energy, so it
seems that inherent flaws doom Zeno to be labled

a historical P.I.T.A.

Well, so, he was!
An interesting fellow.

Thanks Tom, xlr8tC
I won't worry my curly locks any more.

Tom, where does your childhood question end, though?
Is it not soluble?

r.

Tomas

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/

:D

surfcity40

that question includes time in the equation. common sense would dictate that any motion would have to have an amount of "time" before the next movement because the motion is occuring over "time". but if you dissect that amount of time to its essense it disappears. so the answer is really, "it's always now." since it is never not "now", the movement/time/etc. is an illusion. you are staring at now and creating the fluiditity (illusion of movement/time passing) with your imagination.

given that it is always now, i've always struggled with "if i can remember the past why can't i remember the future, given they are both illusions?"

farberio

So, is there a third dimension? I read an article that says that the third dimension may be an illusion of two dimensions like a hologram. I think it was in Scientific America but I cant find the article.

Anyone else come across this theory?

surfcity40

you meant fourth? (or maybe not)....but we're pretty two dimensional here

click this link if you really want to know what is going on here.

Tomas

4th dimension? I dunno, but my box is so cool it's a tesseract...

It seems bigger on the inside than it is on the outside, and must have at least one dimension rotated 90 degrees from everyhting else...

(Or does that just make it two cubes orthogonal to each other - wait - that's tesseract.)