Impossible questions

Recommended Videos

TheNumber1Zero

Forgot to Remember
Jul 23, 2009
7,345
0
0
Yes?

What is the color of mischeif?

Can you answer a question that asks you if your answer to the question will be no and still be correct with your answer?
 

Lukeje

New member
Feb 6, 2008
4,048
0
0
traski999 said:
Berethond said:
traski999 said:
GHMonkey said:
What happens when two object going light speed collide?
Nothing only light can move at the speed of light (ironic no?) and light has no mass... it'd pass right through.
Untrue, photons do have mass. That's where the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle comes in, you cannot know the location and velocity of a sub-atomic particle at the same time. That's because one or the other changes when hit by a photon.
No they do not. For something to attain the speed of light while having mass it would require an infinite amount of energy because the mass of the object reaches infinity. Photons act as a particle and a wave but are mass-less.
They have rest-mass... and they also have momentum.
 

traski999

New member
Sep 8, 2009
12
0
0
Lukeje said:
traski999 said:
Berethond said:
traski999 said:
GHMonkey said:
What happens when two object going light speed collide?
Nothing only light can move at the speed of light (ironic no?) and light has no mass... it'd pass right through.
Untrue, photons do have mass. That's where the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle comes in, you cannot know the location and velocity of a sub-atomic particle at the same time. That's because one or the other changes when hit by a photon.
No they do not. For something to attain the speed of light while having mass it would require an infinite amount of energy because the mass of the object reaches infinity. Photons act as a particle and a wave but are mass-less.
They have rest-mass... and they also have momentum.
The Momentum of the photon is attained by the equation p=(h/2pi)k which has nothing to do with mass at all. Further the photons "rest-mass" is derived from the equation E=mc^2 which if you take the energy of a singe photon and divide it by the speed of light in a vacuum squared (approximately 9 x 10^16 m/s) it is going to be such a small number that it is irrelevant.
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,860
0
41
Heres an equation i like to call eh?

eh=eh+1

What value is eh.

If you slowed down a photon (a light "partical")how much would it weigh?

if gods an athiest (he cannot have faith because he knows everything, and faith requires the belief in something that ISNT proven.) then why do those trying to be closest to god the least like god by having the most faith. Surely to get closer to god you need less faith to be like him. TAKE THAT FRABRIC OF THE UNIVERSE.

1 divided by 0=

Divide by zero please i wish to time travel.

PROVE definitively without using stated thoughts and opinions (provable facts) that you all are not figments of my imagination. Saying " i think therefor i am" isnt valid. I know that quote so my subconcious could pull it from my memory and make any imagined persons quote it at me.
 

crudus

New member
Oct 20, 2008
4,415
0
0
roflmaoftw1 said:
What is the value of a human life?
<a href=http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1808049,00.html>50 grand
or 129k depending on who you ask.

Dart DeathClaw said:
How I mine for fish?
you search for fish fossils.
 

Lukeje

New member
Feb 6, 2008
4,048
0
0
traski999 said:
Lukeje said:
traski999 said:
Berethond said:
traski999 said:
GHMonkey said:
What happens when two object going light speed collide?
Nothing only light can move at the speed of light (ironic no?) and light has no mass... it'd pass right through.
Untrue, photons do have mass. That's where the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle comes in, you cannot know the location and velocity of a sub-atomic particle at the same time. That's because one or the other changes when hit by a photon.
No they do not. For something to attain the speed of light while having mass it would require an infinite amount of energy because the mass of the object reaches infinity. Photons act as a particle and a wave but are mass-less.
They have rest-mass... and they also have momentum.
The Momentum of the photon is attained by the equation p=(h/2pi)k which has nothing to do with mass at all. Further the photons "rest-mass" is derived from the equation E=mc^2 which if you take the energy of a singe photon and divide it by the speed of light in a vacuum squared (approximately 9 x 10^16 m/s) it is going to be such a small number that it is irrelevant.
I never claimed the rest-mass of a photon had anything to do with the momentum. The two points are unrelated. In the first instance you claimed that photons have no mass. This is incorrect because they have rest-mass (their mass if they were to "stand-still"; this is of course forbidden quantum mechanically). The second point was that two photons would simply "pass through" each other; if you model them as corpuscles then this is obviously false if they have momentum. Of course, if they both have the same energy then the two photons "bouncing-off" each other would appear exactly the same as the two photons passing through each other. It should be noted that the corpuscle approximation is not at all correct; at closest approach the two wavefunctions would overlap and you would get a superimposition of the two photons. Thus it could be said that the two photons neither really "collide" nor "pass-through each other", just that some quantum mechanical weirdness goes on.
 

Kruxxor

New member
Jan 18, 2009
392
0
0
Not sure if this one has been posted (5 pages long, wow)

If Pinocchio said "My nose will grow now" what would happen?
 

traski999

New member
Sep 8, 2009
12
0
0
Lukeje said:
traski999 said:
Lukeje said:
traski999 said:
Berethond said:
traski999 said:
GHMonkey said:
What happens when two object going light speed collide?
Nothing only light can move at the speed of light (ironic no?) and light has no mass... it'd pass right through.
Untrue, photons do have mass. That's where the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle comes in, you cannot know the location and velocity of a sub-atomic particle at the same time. That's because one or the other changes when hit by a photon.
No they do not. For something to attain the speed of light while having mass it would require an infinite amount of energy because the mass of the object reaches infinity. Photons act as a particle and a wave but are mass-less.
They have rest-mass... and they also have momentum.
The Momentum of the photon is attained by the equation p=(h/2pi)k which has nothing to do with mass at all. Further the photons "rest-mass" is derived from the equation E=mc^2 which if you take the energy of a singe photon and divide it by the speed of light in a vacuum squared (approximately 9 x 10^16 m/s) it is going to be such a small number that it is irrelevant.
I never claimed the rest-mass of a photon had anything to do with the momentum. The two points are unrelated. In the first instance you claimed that photons have no mass. This is incorrect because they have rest-mass (their mass if they were to "stand-still"; this is of course forbidden quantum mechanically). The second point was that two photons would simply "pass through" each other; if you model them as corpuscles then this is obviously false if they have momentum. Of course, if they both have the same energy then the two photons "bouncing-off" each other would appear exactly the same as the two photons passing through each other. It should be noted that the corpuscle approximation is not at all correct; at closest approach the two wavefunctions would overlap and you would get a superimposition of the two photons. Thus it could be said that the two photons neither really "collide" nor "pass-through each other", just that some quantum mechanical weirdness goes on.
Hmmm... you have valid points. I concede the victory to you good sir. This has been fun though =D.
 

orangebandguy

Elite Member
Jan 9, 2009
3,117
0
41
Da pyro man 999 said:
Befor you ask the most obvious one, the meaning to life is 42(hitch hickers guide to the galaxy)come up with one.
Actually, Deep thought the computer that came up with the answer was proven wrong. Because the question was asked wrong.
 

WickedSkin

New member
Feb 15, 2008
615
0
0
Yuriatayde said:
effilctar said:
Hyperactiveman said:
How does gravity work? (NOT meaning "what does it do?")
if you mean what is responsible for gravity: gravitons

if you mean how are we pulled towards something by gravity: it's like being magnetically attracted except instead of having a greater magnetic field strength, the object has a greater mass which gives it a greater gravitational field strength. g=GM/(r^2) where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the object and r^2 is the mean radius of the object squared.
Or in short, it's like a magnet, and blah blah blah (he asked for how it works, not math stating how well it works, no points for over-complicating in an effort to make yourself seem smarter)

It's currently unexplainable, all we know is that it DOES, and it does at a rate of blah blah blah. What he's asking for, (and me for that matter) is an explanation of how object X can pull on object Y with absolutely nothing connecting them in any way.

[edit] Disregard; I overlooked the "Gravitons", although that's hardly an explanation and I still discard your answer.

OT: If you have a gun that shoots bullets at exactly 2000km/h, and you were on a platform moving you exactly 2000km/h, and you fired the gun backwards... What would happen?
The bullet would just drop in front of you.