Leading on from my other thread, faster than light travel?

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
User avatar
DooMer
Posts: 3068
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 1999 8:00 am

Post by DooMer »

What the fuck is wrong with you?
SplishSplash
Posts: 4467
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am

Post by SplishSplash »

I like rubbing it in.
tnf
Posts: 13010
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2001 8:00 am

Post by tnf »

You haven't rubbed anything in other than that you don't get it. I could have told you 200 years ago flight was possible. The laws that govern the universe and the limitations they impart on nature are not intellectual states. We observed flight, and thus knew it was possible by said laws. We haven't observed FTL travel, and thus need to keep researching before we can even be sure if it is possible.
Plausibility is a different thing. There's the intellectual state you are talking about.
xer0s
Posts: 12446
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 8:00 am

Post by xer0s »

Yep, Da Vinci knew it was possible, but he just didn't have the means of building his craft...
SplishSplash
Posts: 4467
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am

Post by SplishSplash »

Look, we're going in circles here. I could tell you one more time that in 200 years someone might say "Burkhard Heim knew FTL was possible."

From our perspective Da Vinci may have been right, but from the perspective of 200 years ago, he could have been flat-out wrong, and I am sure there were many people that thought so.

They didn't know the laws of aerodynamics and we dont't know the laws of FTL travel. It could have been possible, or maybe not. You have to be a moron to not see the parallel here.

That is the intellectual scale (I never said intellectual state, shows how well you read my posts) I was talking about and you just don't get it. Sorry dude.
SplishSplash
Posts: 4467
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am

Post by SplishSplash »

And if you start this "Birds can fly and so can we!" shit again I'll have a nervous breakdown because if you don't understand that from a perspective of 200 years ago bird flight had ZERO implications on whether human flight would ever be possible than I just don't know what to say.
Grudge
Posts: 8587
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 8:00 am

Post by Grudge »

this thread shouldn't have to be 4 pages
Hannibal
Posts: 1853
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2000 8:00 am

Re:

Post by Hannibal »

ek wrote:hey guys i found this amazing book about the speed of light, lets discuss it to detail, and then i'll try and find more amazing books.

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Rrg ... ght&pgis=1

:olo:

ek owned this thread.
Tsakali
Posts: 7175
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2000 8:00 am

Re: Leading on from my other thread, faster than light travel?

Post by Tsakali »

ah! this was a good thread :up:
User avatar
Whiskey 7
Posts: 9709
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:00 am

Re:

Post by Whiskey 7 »

Grudge wrote:this thread shouldn't have to be 4 pages
Nice bump :up: but
SplishSplash wrote:
One could say that. Or one could say that you keep missing the point of a discussion.
:D
[color=#FFBF00]Physicist [/color][color=#FF4000]of[/color] [color=#0000FF]Q3W[/color]
Grudge
Posts: 8587
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 8:00 am

Re: Leading on from my other thread, faster than light travel?

Post by Grudge »

I wonder if SplishSplash still holds this view
LawL
Posts: 18358
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:49 am

Re: Leading on from my other thread, faster than light travel?

Post by LawL »

Oh yes, I wonder that too. Faggot.
Thick, solid and tight in all the right places.
Post Reply