Random Answers for Random Idiots with Random Questions
- Thread starter TiloXofXTanto
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Nope it would never form a mushroom cloud even if it was detonated in space with a camera watching it. It would in fact form a sphere of expanding and thus cooling plasma/hard radiation because a sphere is the most energetically stable shape. The mushroom cloud would only form in an atmosphere as they are caused by the intense heat that generates rapid convection upwards, as this column of material rises (this is the 'stalk' of the mushroom cloud) it cools and then begins to spread out as the convection updraft begins to weaken. Eventually it's no longer accelerating up and as it cools it falls back down. This is what generates the mushroom 'head'.teebeeohh said:
But that's probably not the answer you were looking for so if you don't like that one then...
If a tree falls in the forest, and no living organism that can perceive sound is around to hear it except for ONE MAN, but the tree falls on that man and that man dies, then would the man dying or screaming from the death make a sound if it was made after he could no longer perceive sound?
When earlier being asked a question, you gave what was thought to be an intelligent answer to Not G. Ivingname, in which he explained as this:
"Rather shocked, so I decided I would stump him with the old "what happens if you devide by zero." His answer? "The square root of negative infinity to the log of -7 power." I looked up deviding by zero, an it turned out he was technically correct.
Since A/B=C also can be written as BxC=A, it stands to reason that in 0xC=0, C can be all numbers, he was correct."
But then that was counter-argued with the following:
"He actually was not correct on the math problem. You asked him "1/0=?".
Using that formula that you looked up, the variables would be as follows:
A=1 , B=0 , C=?
now convert it to B*C=A and you get --> 0*? = 1
Now, as you tried to use in your "proof" that he was correct, 0*x=0 for all x (x being any number)
Therefore, 0*?=1 is a contradiction, and thus the problem is false (unsolvable)
The correct answer to the question of x/0 is "undefined"
(to those who say it is "infinity", that is actually the limit of x/n as n approaches 0, which is completely different)
So, he was not correct in his answer of "The square root of negative infinity to the log of -7 power."
He was just giving a stupid answer to a question that has no answer."
Which explanation seems more reasonable?
Lastly, someone could think they are correct, but could easily be proven wrong by another person. But that person who proved them wrong could be proven wrong of that same statement by another person. So in theory, what is correct seems to be merely what is most socially accepted by Mankind. Does this mean that our entire civilization's knowledge could be all wrong?
When earlier being asked a question, you gave what was thought to be an intelligent answer to Not G. Ivingname, in which he explained as this:
"Rather shocked, so I decided I would stump him with the old "what happens if you devide by zero." His answer? "The square root of negative infinity to the log of -7 power." I looked up deviding by zero, an it turned out he was technically correct.
Since A/B=C also can be written as BxC=A, it stands to reason that in 0xC=0, C can be all numbers, he was correct."
But then that was counter-argued with the following:
"He actually was not correct on the math problem. You asked him "1/0=?".
Using that formula that you looked up, the variables would be as follows:
A=1 , B=0 , C=?
now convert it to B*C=A and you get --> 0*? = 1
Now, as you tried to use in your "proof" that he was correct, 0*x=0 for all x (x being any number)
Therefore, 0*?=1 is a contradiction, and thus the problem is false (unsolvable)
The correct answer to the question of x/0 is "undefined"
(to those who say it is "infinity", that is actually the limit of x/n as n approaches 0, which is completely different)
So, he was not correct in his answer of "The square root of negative infinity to the log of -7 power."
He was just giving a stupid answer to a question that has no answer."
Which explanation seems more reasonable?
Lastly, someone could think they are correct, but could easily be proven wrong by another person. But that person who proved them wrong could be proven wrong of that same statement by another person. So in theory, what is correct seems to be merely what is most socially accepted by Mankind. Does this mean that our entire civilization's knowledge could be all wrong?
so as long as we build a big enough space ship and put an atmosphere around the outer hull we would get a mushroom cloud?x EvilErmine x said:Nope it would never form a mushroom cloud even if it was detonated in space with a camera watching it. It would in fact form a sphere of expanding and thus cooling plasma/hard radiation because a sphere is the most energetically stable shape. The mushroom cloud would only form in an atmosphere as they are caused by the intense heat that generates rapid convection upwards, as this column of material rises (this is the 'stalk' of the mushroom cloud) it cools and then begins to spread out as the convection updraft begins to weaken. Eventually it's no longer accelerating up and as it cools it falls back down. This is what generates the mushroom 'head'.teebeeohh said:
But that's probably not the answer you were looking for so if you don't like that one then...
i only thought of the question because i ran into a guy on Friday night who would not believe that explosion will not be firey in space.
captcha: quirized Bglll do murlocs make those things?
Excuse me sir but the last time I checked "capable" didn't mean "indispensable". Just because humans can hear a sound, it doesn't mean the sound doesn't exist when there's no one hearing it. That's like saying the Universe wouldn't exist if humans don't explore it.crop52 said:
i have never watched the OC.georgesell123 said:Why did the OC have to end? Surely the ratings didn't drop so much in season 3?
but if it was on FOX. then its just fox being stupid like always.
they cancel everything good.
family guy got dropped twice. and futurama.
and the Simpsons live on. wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy after they stopped being funny.
Nope, Perfectly reasonable.DefinitelyPsychotic said:
1. The tree and man would (by my style of thinking) make a sound up until you hit the point where the man dies, at which point, both will stop making "sounds" but continue to make "atmospheric vibrations"OroCrimson said:
2. I will be honest that I just gave a random answer to sound rather humorous, however I have to note that it does have an answer, mathematicians just haven't invented that specific system yet.
3. Yes, a good portion of it is wrong in fact. Most prevalent failings in knowledge include: history, quantum physics (portions of it), Biology (cell theory and all lifeforms being carbon-based mostly), and psychology (mostly my fault).
Crazy random number generators.King Toasty said:
1.*cough* sorry, my fault....DoctorPhil said:
2. Nope, 50% of other beings would cause you to cease to exist by being within 20 light-years of you.
3. hm, to be is boring, but to not be is to also be everything. For if I were to not be, I would be nothing, and therefore zero. Being zero, I would be nothing, but I would be all. The dimensions of a point are 0,0,0 I would be a point, and simultaneously be all of them. I WOULD BE THE UNIVERSE, while simultaneously being nothing.
Pretty much all of it (and then some more)Buchholz101 said:
When the Earth begins to slowly tilt into the fourth dimension.shadyh8er said:
Okay, seriously, I'd guess a month
