[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 89 KB, 250x359, IMG_7122.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8541271 No.8541271 [Reply] [Original]

Hit me with your most ridiculous scientific theories. Bonus points for theories in the realm of Stephen Hawking. More bonus points for 'Failed Stephen Hawking' theories.

>> No.8541277

>>8541271
I Can't Believe It's Not Butter is actually butter

>> No.8541283
File: 38 KB, 383x500, dont_make_me_get_out_of_this_chair.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8541283

>>8541271
Stephen Hawking isn't actually paralyzed. He just turned ugly and did this as a publicity stunt.

>> No.8541295

hmm I want to go with black holes are mostly wrong and there is some universal restriction like the speed of light that would apply to large masses to eliminate the possibility of the singularity from happening.

>> No.8541343

The wave function is a result of particles oscilating through an additional, unkown dimension. This gives the illusion of probability.

>> No.8541346

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

>> No.8541425

>>8541277
I Can't Believe It's Not ENB

>> No.8541443
File: 8 KB, 220x147, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8541443

>>8541343
Nah son, e=mc^peared

>> No.8541466

Here's one.

There are no: complex, negative and decimal numbers.

Only positive integers and 0

>> No.8541477

>>8541466
No numbers actually exist you spastic

>> No.8541488

>>8541271
The Great Filter is the invention of the 3D-printed waifu.

>> No.8541496

>>8541477
Then how do you count if there are no numbers? Check fucking mate

Get wit the times brainlet.
0.1 is just a representation of 1 out of 10
You can't have a -1 of something.
You can't have a square root of a negative number. Making up new shit that doesn't exist (i.e IMAGINARY numbers is absolutely idiotic)

God, why is everyone so blind. Why can't we leave the old math behind and accept the new correct math that is much more accurate.

>> No.8541506

Every particle is actually one end of a wormhole.
The equivalent of a black hole/white hole for each of the three other fundamental forces.
Quantum entanglement is just the branching of two wormholes into a single Y-shaped one.

>> No.8541512

>>8541496
Every number is imaginary, m8. They all only exist in your head.

>> No.8541529

Evolution

>> No.8541554

I believe Ronald Coase's theory that states businesses only exist to keep transaction costs low also applies to ALL kinds of human relationships. If we imagine the "single market" to be a market with economic conditions, people only seem to tie the knot in order to keep the "transaction costs" low; regular dating as a single causes lots of effort and costs. Hell, even friendships work that way. Where's my nobel prize?

>> No.8541559

>>8541554
definitely worth a bachelor thesis lmao

>> No.8541622

Universe behaves randomly; we just happen to live in a sequence of RNG where this kind of order for 15 milliard years just happened. Just like throwing 10^100000 dices in a row and got all 6.

>> No.8541626

>>8541622
I mean, if you throw dice VERY MUCH, you will eventually end up in a sequence that codes the entire behavior of universe for 15 mrd years. Or in the dice analogue, you will eventually throw 10^1000000 number 6 in a row. Then one throw after that everything plunges into chaos and humanity and all "order" in the universe vanishes entirely in 10^-300 seconds.

>> No.8541630

>>8541277
have you considered the possibility of margarine, almost identical to butter except for the simple fact that its not actually butter. Perfect example of misperception. A common instinct in-built into your fellow mammals

>> No.8541643

>>8541271
Don't quote me on this but I heard he once said if their were time travel in the future then their should visitors from the future. So that got me thinking and I thought another thing that can't exist is a object that has infinite mass because we would be dead by now because a. It would have infinite gravity and b. If it got caught in a gravitational field it would have infinite weight in turn infinite force

>> No.8541648

>>8541643
Or, you know, gravity law doesn't work correctly on objects of infinite mass.

That's the problem with non-mathematicians. They always think their approximation-laws (like universal law of gravity) holds perfectly in all critical situations and over all boundaries.

>> No.8541671

>>8541648
Your right I'm no mathematician or physicist I just figured it was a fun thought besides if what you just said is right in that a object of infinite mass doesn't make sense mathematically that's another reason it can't exists

>> No.8541704

>>8541671
I agree, infinite mass wouldn't make sense mathematically/physically. It would require infinite space to contain it, or you would have it contained in a finite field and it would exert enormous gravity. It's formation would have taken infinite amount of time, or it would have always existed. Any perturbation in it's composition or towards it would reverberate infinitely, creating so much information that entire universes would exist in those perturbation waves.

>> No.8541720
File: 11 KB, 274x290, jews.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8541720

>>8541271
I'm sorry to red pill you. Hawking is just a living puppet for Leonard Mlodinow.

Think about it. Hawking is wheeled out on stage. He presents over a computer (and we all know how impossible it is to send messages remotely over a wireless computer).

Who is going to debate a paralyzed man? Who is going to call him a crackpot? It would be the academic equivalent of kicking a puppy.

So the physicist behind the scenes gets to say anything he wants, Hawking gets to be portrayed as this brilliant genius, he gets tenure and a guaranteed income from the book sales, everybody wins.

>> No.8541745

>>8541704
The thing with infinity is that it's something you can't really put into practice we don't even know infinite anything exists
(P.C I'm the guy that posted >>8541643 and >>8541671)

>> No.8541838

everythings got an infinite gravity

>> No.8541853

everything got an infinite gravity
>>8541643

>> No.8542031

>>8541466
>>8541496
This guy knows what's up

Only 1 and 0 are needed to exist to produce this Universe, everything else on the number line is literally a function of either 1 or 0 that is paused mid-execution. "-5" is simply a function that reduces the sum content of a couple of ones collected together, it doesn't exist separately in reality. There are no -5 apples, but there are 5 apples that eventually and inevitably will witness the "-5" executed to their sum.

The Universe also tends to balance out the overly-summed "ones" by executing the opposite queued deductive functions and degrading the sum to the very lowest energy content, equally spread out to infinity. This proves that any structure that is above the lowest content of information that a given region of space contains is nothing but a temporary inflated "bubble" that will crash eventually in a Heat Death - nothing but an artificial illusion.

>> No.8542266

>>8541622
>>8541626
Het is billion, niet milliard.

>> No.8542296

>>8541506
Nigga what in the fuq.

>> No.8543176

>>8541271
Cohen's method of forcing for inconsistency proofs is bullshit. It's just so abstract that looking for issues in it is like trying to find a coherent plot in Finnegans Wake.

Anyway, the Continuum Hypothesis is true.

>> No.8543181

it's not ridiculous, just remote:
we could find a planet that's moving agravitationally, and use a spectrometer on it

>> No.8543233

>>8541720
>Who is going to debate a paralyzed man? Who is going to call him a crackpot? It would be the academic equivalent of kicking a puppy.

sign me the fuck up senpai, called him out on his theories before the whole "brown hole" incident.

>> No.8543234

>>8541643
wasn't classical time travel pretty much disproved this year?


http://thescienceexplorer.com/universe/thanks-pear-shaped-nucleus-we-likely-won-t-ever-time-travel

>> No.8544706

>>8541643
>don't quote me
>>8541853
>>8543234
>>8541648
>Quotes him
Wew

>> No.8544713

>implying that I'd give u something I'll win nobel prize for
pshh

>> No.8544843

>>8541496
*cough* impedance *cough*

>> No.8544892

>>8541271
Hahah I was just in the lab a few hours ago. I got one for you. It's a twisted one, it is. Me and some "scientist" were doing lab work for some major corporation... well I can't tell you that much bout me life I tried lots. The universe is slowly ever so slowly rotating about its center like a pinwheel. They know I know but its OK. Thoug't I'd layit to you. Take the integral of E=mc^2... Integral of energy over mass is a constant numberic equation... (m^(2))(c^(2))(1/2). Now, substutite mass with F=ma, now its ((F/a)^2)(c^2)(1/2). Now double integral to get speed. First integral gets you -(c^2 F^2)/(2 a) da, second integral and natural log gets you REAL shit... the one they keep from your fucked minds. Ready?

-ln((1/2)(c^2)(F^2)log((a^e)))=Approximate Loss in Thermal Work per Newton.

Y U don't believe me? 10 kg block accelerates 1m/s (golden ration is the one meter per second)
F=ma=(10kg)(1m/s)=10N of course
It doesn't slow down because gravity cannot pulls it down. It slows down because it loses heat.
-ln((1/2)(300000m/s^2)log(1^e))= infinity (theoretically, yes, realistically no, hah)
This is why the block is moving. Increase it some more to 10 m/s
-ln((1/2)(300000m/s^2)log(((10)^e))= -26.36 Newtons lost
Keep going to 100,000 m/s then see what happens.
-ln((1/2)(300000m/s^2)log(100000^e))= -27.97 Newtons lost.
That's why they don't want us going to space because speed is the nature of reality.

>> No.8544913

>>8541466
I gave you 10 monies, now you owe me 10 monies therefore I am on -10 monies