Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#58 - bronybox (05/18/2012) [-]
MFW people still don't understand to any degree that time is based of the speed of light and how soon we can perceive objects.
MFW people still don't understand to any degree that time is based of the speed of light and how soon we can perceive objects.
#94 to #58 - TheFixer (05/18/2012) [-]
all time happens at once, our actions have no bearing because we were always going to do them, in the same token every possible permutation of an event also occurs giving the illusion of free will when infact it doesnt matter because even if you "choose" to do something a certain way there is are alternate timelines of every possible outcome of that "choice" happening at the same time.
User avatar #96 to #94 - bronybox (05/18/2012) [-]
Under one theory.
If we define free will as the certain action under the timeline branch we followed, then we do have it. At least, I chose to define free will this way.
User avatar #98 to #96 - TheFixer (05/18/2012) [-]
but as i am sure you are aware that with each "choice" we create a fracture point which splinters into timelines of every possible permutation of the outcome of that "choice" and they all happen at the same time right in parallel to "our" timeline so no matter what we do free will is a illusion because every outcome of a "choice" is happening. even right now your and my responses where predetermined to happen baised upon the creation of this post (when ever that happened) and then our viewing of it and then me seeing your comment about how time is how soon we precieve objects.
User avatar #118 to #98 - bronybox (05/18/2012) [-]
So, what I'm saying, is that I define free will in a different way then some, that matches the theory.
User avatar #119 to #118 - TheFixer (05/18/2012) [-]
yes but the way you define it narrow it to the illusion of just the single timeline or rather the subjective view point of a person in the timeline
#70 to #69 - triggathepirate (05/18/2012) [-]
you mean a genyeas?
Eh? eh?
#63 to #58 - srawesome (05/18/2012) [-]
MFW your description of time is super simplified.
User avatar #64 to #63 - bronybox (05/18/2012) [-]
That's the point.
#66 to #64 - srawesome (05/18/2012) [-]
well in that case I will have to play off my lack of understanding in regards to the over simplification of your comment.
well in that case I will have to play off my lack of understanding in regards to the over simplification of your comment.
#76 to #66 - bronybox (05/18/2012) [-]
Here, how about I give a small example. Let's say a car is speeding past your walking speed of 5mph at 100mph. The time is takes for you to get 5 miles in is an hour, and it takes him only 3 minutes. However, if you were to go the same speed as that car, to you, the car would not be "moving" at all, but time would.   
   
In a similar way, we perceive light going at the light constant (~=~ 3 * 10^8 meters/SECOND) But we're going at measly hundreds of miles per hour. So if we were to travel at the speed of light, we would experience the entire universe at a standstill while we continue to move in time.   
   
Now, this is just to my current knowledge, I'm no quantum physicist. But it does seem like a plausible and simple explanation.
Here, how about I give a small example. Let's say a car is speeding past your walking speed of 5mph at 100mph. The time is takes for you to get 5 miles in is an hour, and it takes him only 3 minutes. However, if you were to go the same speed as that car, to you, the car would not be "moving" at all, but time would.

In a similar way, we perceive light going at the light constant (~=~ 3 * 10^8 meters/SECOND) But we're going at measly hundreds of miles per hour. So if we were to travel at the speed of light, we would experience the entire universe at a standstill while we continue to move in time.

Now, this is just to my current knowledge, I'm no quantum physicist. But it does seem like a plausible and simple explanation.
User avatar #77 to #76 - srawesome (05/18/2012) [-]
i understand that. My comment was in reference to my not understanding that you had oversimplified it to make a point.
-2
#85 to #60 - faridthebang **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#89 to #85 - triggathepirate (05/18/2012) [-]
What? wait... was that moron supposed to be bold?   
are you....mocking me?   
See what I did there?
What? wait... was that moron supposed to be bold?
are you....mocking me?
See what I did there?
-1
#106 to #89 - faridthebang **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
 Friends (0)