Ruud Hermans Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I dont think so ruud.. It was actually his wife who came up with most of his ideas. He was reaaaaaaallly horrible at math. Hence why he dropped out of school. Ok, private eye wasnt a porno but penthouse is The revalidation theory (ore how you write it in English) was discovered by a German genius in maths called David Hilbert.E=MC2 was discovered by Olinto de Prettoen and publicated in 1903 Einstein used his writing in 1905.Ruud Hermans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 ok, so 2 of his formulas. Oh well. What does E=MC2 mean anyways? So far ive figured out Energy = Mass*C2, I guess I will go look it up now .EDIT: Yay! I got the first two right, and C is the speed of light. And C2 it the square of light. The speed of light is somewhere around 186,000 Miles per hour. Pretty much rediculously fast. Too fast for anything we have to go without breaking apart and disappearing (you can feasibly do time travel and warp speed and such if you reach speeds above the speed of light). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 That's a little inflamatory. Who exactly did Einstein steal the theories of general relativity and the unified field theory from? There are innumerable speculations which suggest that Einstein was a poor student, a slow learner, or had a form of autism (such as High-functioning autism, or Asperger syndrome), dyslexia, and/or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. According to the biography by Pais (page 36, among others), such speculations are unfounded. Some researchers have periodically claimed otherwise,[59] but most historians and doctors are skeptical of retrospective medical diagnoses, especially for complex and, in the case of ADHD, diagnostically-controversial conditions. Examinations of Albert Einstein's brain after his death have not produced any conclusive evidence of any particular condition.[citation needed]The recurring rumor that Einstein failed in mathematics during his education is untrue. On the contrary, Einstein always showed great talent at mathematics; when he obtained his matura, he obtained the best mark (6/6) in algebra, geometry and physics, among others.[60] The grading system of Switzerland, where 6 is the best mark, may have been confused with the German system, in which 1 is the best mark. David Hilbert actually published the field equation in an article that was dated five days before Einstein's lecture. But according to Thorne (pp. 117–118), Hilbert had discovered the correct derivation after "mulling over things he had learned" on a recent visit by Einstein to Gottingen. Thorne goes on to say "Quite naturally, and in accord with Hilbert's view of things, the resulting law of warpage was quickly given the name the Einstein field equation rather than being named after Hilbert. In fact without Einstein, the general relativistic laws of gravity might not have been discovered until several decades later."That from Wikipedia.The c in E=mc^2 is the speed of light in a vacuum.The equation was first derived (in a slightly different formulation) in 1905 by Albert Einstein, in what are known as his Annus Mirabilis ("Wonderful Year") Papers....According to Umberto Bartocci (University of Perugia historian of mathematics), the correct equation E=mc² was first published on June 16, 1903 by Olinto De Pretto, an industrialist from Vicenza, Italy, though this is not generally regarded as important by mainstream historians. Even though De Pretto was first to introduce the formula and to understand it, it was Einstein who properly derived it.Einstein might not have been the very first person ever to discover what he described, but there's a major difference between that and calling him "a fake". That's just retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Makes you wonder.....what's the meaning of life???That question assumes that there is a meaning of life, which is a big assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 Man, I always feel so stupid . Lol... I read the math thing somewhere though. So it was wrong.. Back to black holes and space shall we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruud Hermans Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 That question assumes that there is a meaning of life, which is a big assumption.Reproducing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Yeah, that would be my answer. The meaning of life is life. The universe could collapse and expand again, and life will return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruud Hermans Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Yeah, that would be my answer. The meaning of life is life.harder one, what's the meaning of life as in having lifeforms??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I don't understand, you mean what is the meaning of there being different species? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruud Hermans Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I don't understand, you mean what is the meaning of there being different species?Whats the use in having any species at all??? Ruud Hermans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 If you take life as a given, then the existence of multiple species comes naturally. The nature of life is to adapt and survive, and that is what the different species are. Each one is uniquely adapted to the environment that they need to survive in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 The nature of life is to adapt and surviveThat brings us to our next random topic! War!We need war.. No doubt about it. It just wouldnt work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruud Hermans Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 If you take life as a given, then the existence of multiple species comes naturally. The nature of life is to adapt and survive, and that is what the different species are. Each one is uniquely adapted to the environment that they need to survive in.Mmm. allmost.If I take a better look at what I think you mean then that is that every specie has a function to make sure things remain the way they are.Yet there is one that doesn't at least not on earth. Every specie gives and takes beside the human race witch only takes from nature and gives nothing in return.*Wondering.....is our purpose to destroy?**reportingsjr...war is only for humans in other cases it's part of survival (see apes). We need it becouse every economy on earth is based on war. Without war there is no work.Ruud Hermans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 *Wondering.....is our purpose to destroy?Of course it is! Thats part of it. Look at my post (above yours, we posted in same minute) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruud Hermans Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Of course it is! Thats part of it. Look at my post (above yours, we posted in same minute)Did and edited. Ruud Hermans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 Yeah right! War isnt only for humans. I count fights as wars. Everything libing has wars between ech other. Ants, Birds, Tiger, Apes, Ants, Fish, Ants, Coral, Ants, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 If I take a better look at what I think you mean then that is that every specie has a function to make sure things remain the way they are.That's not what I mean, I mean that divergent species are a result of different environments. It's not to maintain some balance, it's because one trait works better in one environment (e.g. gills in the ocean) whereas another trait works better in another environment (e.g. lungs on land). There are different species because life had to adapt to survive in the specific environment where it was evolving.Yeah right! War isnt only for humans. I count fights as wars. Everything libing has wars between ech other. Ants, Birds, Tiger, Apes, Ants, Fish, Ants, Coral, Ants, etc...Ants also fight, btw. Humans are unique in that we can destroy most life on the planet easily (and for the first time ever), but that's only because we have adapted brains for critical thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 To make that more scarier we got a few moving black holes in our galaxy and one of them is pretty huge.To get back at the universe expanding witch I read I think on the first page this is called "The big cut" the moment the universe reaches it's maximum width and implodes swallowing everything even time, light and darkness.Makes you wonder.....what's the meaning of life???Btw. Einstein was a fake his o so famous theories where discovered before by others only thing he did was explain them in a way every one could understand.Ruud HermansI have actually been to his house and looked round, it is a National Trust place near Nottingham. He must of discovered his theories because everyone even his mother said how boncuz he was and that things were the way they were because God made them that way. In those days people didn't question why things were as they were because it was against there religion. This is why Einstien was such an extrodinary person! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 There have always been scientists, from the guy who first lit a fire or cooked meat, up through Aristotle, Archimides, Newton, Copernicus, Galileo, Da Vinci.. they have typically all gone against their religions and have been criticized or even punished by the church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 31, 2006 Author Share Posted October 31, 2006 Can we really consider all of those people scientists?I saw a thing on "alien" technology. One of the things was invisibilty. They must have no realized it but a place over in England has already discovered how to "make" invisibilty. They rearrange the electrons into a specific was and you can see through that area! Maybe the could use a mthod of black holes I saw. It was the bending light. Couldnt they just bend the light around an object? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Sure, they could bend the light around it. But with our understanding so far it would take something with enough gravity that it have the side effect of attracting everything for several hundred miles at least. Here's one article about something like that:http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1766219,00.htmlI heard about something else where they could make a 2d object virtually invisible to either microwaves or x-rays. It works pretty well, but only for objects in 2d. It's a ways to go to get an arbitrary 3d shape (or even a sphere) to do the same.Another idea was to have a surface with fiberoptic cameras on the back of it, and fiberoptic displays on the front of it, and simply display what is behind it on the front surface. But that has issues as well, for example wrinkles.As for the scientists, I guess that depends on your definition of what a scientist is, but those people are generally regarded as being scientists (except maybe the caveman). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted October 31, 2006 Author Share Posted October 31, 2006 I see the bending light. Whats that supposed to mean? 2d objects?I saw that fiberoptics thing a while ago and it didnt fit inside my definition of invisible..And the caveman was who I was talking about .Hmm, waiting for someone to click the link in the signature. How many you think will click it? Its for something you must find out.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Here's what I think I read about the microwave invisibility thing:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061019/ap_on_...TdmBHNlYwM3NTM-But I either read a different article (or at least a different picture), or the link on slashdot and fark changed. The picture I remember seeing was one of a cylinder with microwaves coming at it from one direction, and on the opposite side the object was not producing a shadow, the waves were curving around it and being reformed. It also specified a 2d object, but the cylinder they show definately has a height. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted November 3, 2006 Author Share Posted November 3, 2006 Hmm, pretty crazy!I feel like we have broken a record . Check how many views for this topic.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted November 5, 2006 Share Posted November 5, 2006 I think you may have done, nevermind the topic we are talking about being crazy, the ammount of view is tremendous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now