HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Alan Alda poses question ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:51 AM

Alan Alda poses question in new contest for scientists: What is time?

MINEOLA, N.Y. (AP) — Professor Alan Alda has a homework assignment for scientists. Yes, that Alan Alda.

The actor known for portraying Capt. Benjamin Franklin "Hawkeye" Pierce on the TV show "MASH" and more recent guest shots on NBC's "30 Rock" is also a visiting professor at New York's Stony Brook University school of journalism and a founder of the school's Center for Communicating Science.

The center is sponsoring an international contest for scientists asking them to explain in terms a sixth-grader could understand: "What is time?"

Alda is well-known for his affinity for science and is the longtime host of PBS' "Scientific American Frontiers." He said it is vital for society to have a better understanding of science, and puts much of the onus on scientists to better explain their work.

"There's hardly an issue we deal with today that isn't affected by science," Alda said. "I've even heard from a number of people in Congress that they often don't understand what scientists are talking about when they go to Washington to testify, and these are the people who make the decisions about funding and policy."

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/alan-alda-asks-scientists-explain-whats-time#overlay-context=article/new-tests-could-hamper-food-outbreak-detection

83 replies, 6446 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 83 replies Author Time Post
Reply Alan Alda poses question in new contest for scientists: What is time? (Original post)
The Straight Story Dec 2012 OP
tama Dec 2012 #1
rock Dec 2012 #34
Xipe Totec Dec 2012 #54
tama Dec 2012 #66
Xipe Totec Dec 2012 #68
tama Dec 2012 #69
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #50
johnp3907 Dec 2012 #70
randome Dec 2012 #71
johnp3907 Dec 2012 #81
Orrex Dec 2012 #2
Javaman Dec 2012 #38
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #49
kentuck Dec 2012 #3
BeliQueen Dec 2012 #13
unblock Dec 2012 #19
Brother Buzz Dec 2012 #37
MAD Dave Dec 2012 #4
GeorgeGist Dec 2012 #32
Viking12 Dec 2012 #62
Xipe Totec Dec 2012 #82
leftyladyfrommo Dec 2012 #5
Love Bug Dec 2012 #6
Quantess Dec 2012 #7
EOTE Dec 2012 #43
eridani Dec 2012 #8
Jim__ Dec 2012 #9
knightmaar Dec 2012 #16
Tanelorn Dec 2012 #21
SkyDaddy7 Dec 2012 #27
avebury Dec 2012 #25
vlyons Dec 2012 #10
napkinz Dec 2012 #11
tclambert Dec 2012 #12
Madam Mossfern Dec 2012 #17
Occulus Dec 2012 #74
napkinz Dec 2012 #14
Festivito Dec 2012 #15
DetlefK Dec 2012 #18
VWolf Dec 2012 #20
meti57b Dec 2012 #22
Marrah_G Dec 2012 #23
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #24
shireen Dec 2012 #26
BlueJazz Dec 2012 #28
rso Dec 2012 #29
Ganja Ninja Dec 2012 #30
Pakid Dec 2012 #31
hughee99 Dec 2012 #48
Separation Dec 2012 #33
EOTE Dec 2012 #46
Separation Dec 2012 #47
Confusious Dec 2012 #55
Yavin4 Dec 2012 #35
mindwalker_i Dec 2012 #36
jsr Dec 2012 #39
DetlefK Dec 2012 #40
closeupready Dec 2012 #41
reflection Dec 2012 #42
IDemo Dec 2012 #44
MurrayDelph Dec 2012 #45
Confusious Dec 2012 #56
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #51
Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #52
0rganism Dec 2012 #53
sdfernando Dec 2012 #57
El Supremo Dec 2012 #58
The Straight Story Dec 2012 #60
longship Dec 2012 #59
slutticus Dec 2012 #63
longship Dec 2012 #65
Uncle Joe Dec 2012 #75
Rex Dec 2012 #61
liberaltrucker Dec 2012 #64
Care Acutely Dec 2012 #67
laruemtt Dec 2012 #72
randome Dec 2012 #73
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #76
rwork Dec 2012 #77
EnviroBat Dec 2012 #78
Taverner Dec 2012 #79
Lint Head Dec 2012 #80
TheManInTheMac Dec 2012 #83

Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:48 AM

1. Time is

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:30 AM

34. Wait for it ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rock (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 04:19 PM

54. The suspense is killing me...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xipe Totec (Reply #54)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:35 AM

66. ...

 

how slow/fast?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #66)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:15 AM

68. Softly


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xipe Totec (Reply #68)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 10:56 AM

69. So there's your answer, mr. Alda:

 

Time is... softly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:42 PM

50. We knew what time was back in the 50's. I think it goes like this:

"What's Time?"
"A magazine."
"How much?"
"Two bits."
"Too much."
"What's too much?"
"Time."
"What's Time?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:00 AM

70. 11:00 am

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnp3907 (Reply #70)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:08 AM

71. Then why does your post say 10:00am here in the Midwest? Liar!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 01:01 PM

81. I'm a time traveler.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:52 AM

2. Does anybody really know what time it is?

Does anybody really care?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:06 AM

38. 25 or 6 to 4 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:39 PM

49. Cue the trumpets. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:54 AM

3. Our concept of time is totally wrong.

Time does not go forward. Time goes backward. A baby born today is so much older than you. Please do not ask me to explain it further.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:26 AM

13. If I understand your reasoning...

A baby born today is exactly the same age you are older.

So if I'm 56, the baby is 56 years older than me because she was born 56 years later.

Interesting outlook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:52 AM

19. ...sdrawkcab ti evah thgim uoy kniht i

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:57 AM

37. Shazbot!

(alarm for Mork's wristwatch which he wears round his ankle goes off)
Mindy McConnell: Ah, your foot's ringing. I'll get it.
(bends down and pushes button on watch, pulls out small piece of paper under watch strap)
Mindy McConnell: What's this piece of paper?
Mork: Must be a footnote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:54 AM

4. Time is......

..... A human construct used to measure and compared the length of a human life and to mark other significant events.

I have listened to a CBC documentary about time twice. Many physicists are quite sure time as we envision it, does not exist!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MAD Dave (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:59 AM

32. e=mc^2

Requires time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgeGist (Reply #32)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:04 PM

62. "Requires time" is not accurate.

Shows time is not a constant would be a more accurate way to describe the relationship between the equation and time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Viking12 (Reply #62)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 01:30 PM

82. Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so - Ford Prefect

Very deep, you should send that in to the Reader's Digest. They've got a page for people like you. - Arthur Dent

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:56 AM

5. I like to play with the concept of time

while I'm driving - I drive a lot and get bored. Driving into the future - one second at a time.

Time is really such an interesting thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:02 AM

6. All I know is

there never seems to be enough of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:05 AM

7. I always thought that time and space are constructs

so they we don't experience everything all at once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Quantess (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:02 AM

43. If we truly don't experience everything all at once (as it appears we don't).

Then time isn't a construct, it's woven into the fabric of reality. If time is truly a man-made construct, then we DO experience everything all at once, it's just that we "choose" to look only at little slices at once. I know that a number of physicists do believe that time is not truly real (not the bulk of them), but frankly I think that's grasping at straws, attempting to make their own jobs easier or to fit in with their preconceived notions of what space-time is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:05 AM

8. Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:06 AM

9. Alan Alda's question, "What is a flame?", always fascinated me as a child.

I don't think I ever got an answer to it; and finally figured it out when I was in college. But, is there an answer that is comprehensible to a 6th grader to the question, "What is a flame?" Wikipedia, of course has a pretty good answer:

Color and temperature of a flame are dependent on the type of fuel involved in the combustion, as, for example, when a lighter is held to a candle. The applied heat causes the fuel molecules in the candle wax to vaporize. In this state they can then readily react with oxygen in the air, which gives off enough heat in the subsequent exothermic reaction to vaporize yet more fuel, thus sustaining a consistent flame. The high temperature of the flame causes the vaporized fuel molecules to decompose, forming various incomplete combustion products and free radicals, and these products then react with each other and with the oxidizer involved in the reaction. Sufficient energy in the flame will excite the electrons in some of the transient reaction intermediates such as CH and C2, which results in the emission of visible light as these substances release their excess energy (see spectrum below for an explanation of which specific radical species produce which specific colors). As the combustion temperature of a flame increases (if the flame contains small particles of unburnt carbon or other material), so does the average energy of the electromagnetic radiation given off by the flame (see Black body).


But is that comprehensible to a 6th grader? To a congress person?

Part of the responsibility is is with the scientist to be able to explain things in simple terms. But all adults, and especially congress people, also have a responsibility to be somewhat familiar with scientific concepts.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim__ (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:31 AM

16. "What is a flame?" is best explained by this video:



And yes, a child could understand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to knightmaar (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:56 AM

21. Wow .Well explained. Especially the mnemonic song at the end

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to knightmaar (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:25 AM

27. Yes, a child could understand this BUT...

I doubt most our anti-science Congressional reps could...Especially the Republicans in the House!!

BTW-Great Video!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim__ (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:21 AM

25. I totally agree.

Unfortunately too many Conservatives don't believe in science, don't like science, or don't want to have their children taught science because too many concepts in science conflicts where their personal religious beliefs. For example some kids are taught that dinosaurs are a myth, others are taught that man and dinosaurs co-existed. Some people refuse to believe that the earth has been around as long as it has. Rational and critical thinking abilities are just as important as understanding familiar scientific concept. Instead of trying to keep kids thinking within the box, they should be taught to think outside the box. That is how so many scientific breakthroughs are made.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:08 AM

10. Time is

the unfolding of the consequences of the confluence of previous events. Some Asians call it karma. From Einstein physics, we have come to understand that time and space are entwined as space-time, which is relative to light and mass (gravity).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:24 AM

11. Really? Who cares?

Who gives a damn about Time!

Or Life!

Give me Sports Illustrated! Or Better Homes and Gardens.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:24 AM

12. Toughie. You can't really even define a second. It depends how fast you're going.

Relative to me. If you fly out to a nearby star at close to the speed of light, you could come back in a hundred years, but only be one year older. (Twin paradox, they call it. (You'd be younger than your twin.))

There is a hypothesis in physics that time does not exist. Each "moment" is actually a separate universe.

And, of course, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey . . . stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tclambert (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:35 AM

17. I ascribe to your last explanation

I've often 'bent time' to get to places 'on time.'
It usually involved kids and classes.

I can't define it, but somehow I know it's not linear.
Only our construct of it is linear so we can be practical.

But that's particular to our construct of reality of place and purpose.
Thinking like this usually sends me into horrible bouts of existential despair.

Damn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tclambert (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:16 AM

74. Ooooo, my favorite episode

"Don't blink. Blink and you're dead."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:31 AM

14. great 60s song by The Chamber Brothers







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:31 AM

15. Time is our realization that more than two similar movements occurred.

All measure of time involves movement and can be further characterized as finding more and more consistency of these movements.

The perfect conception of time is a fourth dimension, being one dimension added to the three dimensions we use to describe space, that is space without any movement until time's fourth dimension is added.

The imperfect conception of time is our human conception of measuring time and trying to find more and more consistent movements that describe better and better what we previously measured as consistent. This can lead to us having several different measurements for the above perfect conception of time. For example:

1. a physicist wants to measure with great accuracy for movements large and small and would prefer time measured in some small consistent vibration that can be added together to create a consistent amount of time;

2. a paleontologist wants to describe long numbers of years and prefers rotations around our sun that, again, can be added together to create a consistent amount of time where the actual rotation and angled revolving of our planet effect what he studies more than the number of seconds that transpired in those rotations of the planet.

3. an astro-physicist wants to understand what we might not know yet. How what is consistent here on earth might not remain consistent away from earth or may change beyond our star system and then again it could change again beyond our galaxy, and further as we exit what might be our globule or closeness to one, and on and on again and again as we might discover and name even larger agglomerations in the universe.

4. a philosopher realizes that all these measurements are ego-centric, that is they all evolve around who we are and what we want, what we want sometimes being a desire to understand physics, history and the universe in order to better our own position in our time and maybe, if we are lucky, to extend our lives for a little more time to enjoy the time we have.

And, that's enough time on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:36 AM

18. The conjugated variable to energy. :D

You need energy to change a state over time just like you need momentum to change a state with respect to space and angular momentum for changes in angle. Bazinga!


Or how about this: In a phase-space, time is the place where all processes with increasing entropy go.
(Looks like Delmore Schwartz was right with his "Time is the fire in which we burn.")


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:54 AM

20. That was my first thought as well

but you beat me to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:07 AM

22. I'm not sure what time actually is, but I know it goes by faster as you get older.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:11 AM

23. Time is a way of counting the rotations of the earth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:19 AM

24. If Members of Congress can't understand what scientists are telling them, perhaps...

...we should elect smarter (in some cases, much smarter) representatives.

Gee, what a novel concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:25 AM

26. time is the forward flow of our existence

and it's moving way too fast for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:42 AM

28. Time keeps everything from happening at once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:47 AM

29. time

Time is a creation of the human collective. It is a "rule of the game" in physical existence, and it allows us to experience events one after the other instead of all at once, as it is in ultimate reality. As such, it is really nothing but a pre-conceived notion in physical existence. For example, as Einstein stated, 30 minutes in a dentist's chair pass quite a bit slower than 30 minutes enjoying yourself with a loved one. So it is not as rigid as we may think, and during meditation and other such events, the elasticity of time becomes quite apparent. In short, a conventional scientist cannot really come close to an explanation of time, but a combination scientist-mystic like Einstein, Tagore or Spencer can come closest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:54 AM

30. Time is ..

the chronological passage of events within our universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:54 AM

31. If you are trying to explain this to a Republican member of congress

You had better have a explanation that a two year old could understand and if that member happens to be a tea bagger good luck because they don't seem able to understand much of anything

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pakid (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 01:06 PM

48. Time is either "money" or "Morris Day's backup band".

That should be simple enough for them

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:04 AM

33. Saw an interesting documentary on time and relativity

The big example they were talking about was the sun. Our planet has an orbital path based on the sun. Light from the sun takes aproximately 7 seconds to get here. So does is our orbit based on the sun from 7 seconds ago or the sun as it sits 7 seconds from now, and is that an example of time travel? It was way higher than my educational paygrade, but still interesting to watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Separation (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:21 AM

46. If we were 7 light seconds away from the sun, we'd be burnt to a crisp.

That's only a smidge more than a million miles away. We're about 90 million miles away from the sun, or about 8 light minutes away.

And because nothing travels faster than light (including the effects of gravity), our instantaneous orbit is based upon the sun we see 8 minutes ago, not the one that we see now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #46)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 01:00 PM

47. Ooops my bad

I meant 7-8 minutes not seconds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Separation (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 04:25 PM

55. You're seeing the sun as it was 8 minutes ago

And that light was created something like 100,000 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:33 AM

35. Time is on my side

Yes, it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:45 AM

36. Scientific American had a special issue on time

It was the year-end issue of 2011, and it discussed how time doesn't come out of any equation of physics - it always tends to cancel out completely. All events can be measured relative to physical events instead of time, kind of like we could barter instead of using money.

There's also reason to think that quantum mechanics transcends time. Measuring one particle that's entangled with another can affect its partner retroactively. A recent experiment by Anton Zellinger made measurements of two particles that were each entangled with another particle, which entangled the two measured particles and also entangled the two that had already been measured. By doing so, the two already-measured particles were shown to have correlated values.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:08 AM

39. What is a dimension?

Time is just another dimension.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jsr (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:44 AM

40. Time is exactly not that.

Example:
The edges of your desk are a coordinate-system. Height, length, width. (3 dimensions!)
Now take a piece of paper. (2 dimensions!)
You can rotate the paper, so its plane is vertical to the height-axis. Now the 2-dimensional object has no vector-components relating to the height-axis. For this object, height no longer exists.

If time were just another dimension, the same would work with time instead of height:
This time take a coordinate-system with 4 dimensions, time+space, and a 3-dimensional object.
Can you rotate the object in a way that it stops being subject to time?

That's the reason why spacetime is always referred to as being (3+1)-dimensional: Time and space don't mingle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:48 AM

41. Adam Frank recently published "About Time", a popularization

of heavy science concepts relating to time and space, the universe, etc. Well-written, haven't finished it yet, but I'm savoring the read.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:56 AM

42. "The End of Time" by Julian Barbour

is a very interesting book for those who have this exact question. It can be a tough slog at times and can read like a college textbook, but it still kept my interest due to the audacity of his theory.

http://www.amazon.com/End-Time-Next-Revolution-Physics/dp/0195145925

(it is worth noting, however, that many of Barbour's peers scoff at this book, and I am not nearly conversant enough on the subject to judge it. To each his/her own, read at your own risk)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:08 AM

44. Time goes quickly or slowly. You can't explain that n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:15 AM

45. How long "a minute" is

depends on what side of the bathroom door you're on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IDemo (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 04:32 PM

56. Fucking magnets, how do they work?


And I don’t wanna talk to a scientist
Y’all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed.


Sorry been wanting post that for a couple days now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:50 PM

51. I don't know, but I hear it's wibbly-wobbly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:52 PM

52. No matter what, it's later than you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:55 PM

53. time is how things wear out

This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers;
Gnaws iron, bites steel;
Grinds hard stones to meal;
Slays king, ruins town,
And beats high mountain down.
-- Gollum, "The Hobbit"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 04:33 PM

57. Some say that

time is the fire in which we burn. An El-Aurian told me that once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 04:34 PM

58. It's in a bottle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to El Supremo (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:48 PM

60. Yeah, but can you drink it? And what would you mix it with? (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:43 PM

59. S = k log W

There are many more ways for things to be disorganized than to be organized.


Ludwig Boltzmann

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:13 PM

63. What happens when the universe reaches equilibrium?

I've always thought of "time" as the driving force of increasing entropy, but what about at equilibrium? Maybe at small enough scales there would still be local areas of driving force?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slutticus (Reply #63)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 01:35 AM

65. Precisely!! You nailed it.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics does not say entropy always increases. It only says that statistically it is much more likely that disorder will increase. There can still be local areas where disorder decreases. They are just rare because there are so many more arrangements of matter that are more disordered. In other words, the 2nd law is a statistical law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slutticus (Reply #63)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:50 AM

75. Are we for certain that our universe will ever reach thermodynamic equilibrium?

Could it ever kick start into reverse order where time flows backward?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:54 PM

61. Time is thought to be about 10 billion years old

Give or take a few billion. Personally I am not concerned about time, but do worry about space.

Time, space, particles, light and gravity - the five basic building blocks of the universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:25 PM

64. The time is gone. The song is over.

Thought I'd something more to say......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:57 AM

67. Time good

time bad, time never ends . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:13 AM

72. Time is

Time is too slow for those who wait
And time is too swift for those who fear
Time is too long for those who grieve
And time is too short for those that laugh

And love is too slow for those who wait
And love is too swift for those who fear
Love is too long for those who grieve
And love is too short for those that laugh

But for those who love
But for those who really love
But for those who love
Time
Sweet time
Precious time
Lovely time
All the time
Time, time, time, time…
is eternity

Hours fly
Hours fly
Hours fly
But even flowers must die
And then a new day comes
And there's a new day's dawn
And there's a new day's sun
And love stays on
Sweet love stays on
Love stays on
Love stays on
Love, love, love, love
And time, time, time, time…

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laruemtt (Reply #72)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:15 AM

73. That's why we need more stem cell research.

So flowers won't die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:55 AM

76. We are all mortally wounded

by time's arrow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:09 PM

77. When arriving at the event horizon

of a black hole, time stops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:10 PM

78. A human construct used to examine the constant change in all things

from a state of entropy to equilibrium.

Now here's a baby Polar Bear...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:11 PM

79. The Fourth Dimension

 

Height, Length, Breadth and Time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:14 PM

80. The most disturbing thing about this is the quote,

"I've even heard from a number of people in Congress that they often don't understand what scientists are talking about when they go to Washington to testify, and these are the people who make the decisions about funding and policy."

We are sending people to Washington to make critical decisions about the complicated issues that impact our lives and science has to be dumbed down to a sixth grade level for them to understand? How about a High School level? No wonder social problems are manifested in this country. We are electing idiots who don't even realize that bridges need to be replaced once in a while and the infrastructure is falling down around our heads. That space exploration leads to inventions we use on earth. Our even educated in basic Civics. There is something definitely wrong with an education system that turns out graduates who don't have a clue about basic human and social needs.

I'm not a scientist but I can understand the majority of what scientists talk to me about either personally or when I watch one testify before Congress. The difference is that I actually read and study. It does not take an enormous effort to obtain a basic understanding of science. There are rules for all theories, computations and scientific concepts. When a scientist pushes the boundary's of known science he or she is still using the basic rules. The old saying, "It ain't rocket science." is apt here. You do not need to know the exact physics calculations behind something to understand it. Congress has lost all common sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 10:10 PM

83. "You've dedicated your life to educating the general populace about complex scientific ideas.

"Have you ever considered trying to do something useful? Perhaps reading to the elderly? But not your books; something they might enjoy..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread