Real asgard homeowrld.

somuj

Have decided to create my own hyperdrive device. Am going to locate the home of the real Asgard( not the anglelic little creatures from stargate, but the Roswell aliens, the geezers who have been cutting us up for decades ).

Drunk talk I hear you say. Quite possibly, but if the nazi scientists can create anit-gravity contraptions( under duress ), then mere mortals withe the power of Jameson should be able to take it a step further..

Shall need help with this endeavor as I intend to capture Loki as I believe that he is still conducting his illegal experiments on humans but I don't think that I shall be able to locate him without the aid of sensors. This is wehre I need the help of someone who understands the electromagnetic spetrum a little better than I do.

Hyperspace is easy in comparisson. The whole 11 dimensional universe was easy to concur(thank god(ba'al in particular) for strings). Indeed we do live inside a large donut.

Once I have Loki I believe that I can persuade him to give me the co-ordinates of Halla.

Pepe LeFrits

Time to get you sectioned methinks...

mr_angry

Best of luck with all that. Let's hope they don't have Internet access out there though.

mike65

Unless you get your hands on a pack of Dilithium Crystals it'll not work.

Mike.

Pepe LeFrits

mike65 wrote:

Unless you get your hands on a pack of Dilithium Crystals it'll not work.

Mike.

Careful, cross-transposing differing quantum universe methodologies like this could cause the universe to implode. Or possibly explode.

senordingdong

I don't think you can have an explosion in space.

Capt'n Midnight

senordingdong wrote:

I don't think you can have an explosion in space.

yes you can, detonations , deflagrations , the yanks even set off a couple of nukes too one of which caused the lights to go out in Hawaii

then again what with the lack of atmosphere and stuff there wasn't much of a fireball


11 dimensions, in a donut, or is it just nine , I can never remember all this 2D stuff.

Sarky

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

Careful, cross-transposing differing quantum universe methodologies like this could cause the universe to implode. Or possibly explode.

Can't it do both, like the lesser spotted Venezuelan foonlug?

senordingdong

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

yes you can, detonations , deflagrations , the yanks even set off a couple of nukes too one of which caused the lights to go out in Hawaii

then again what with the lack of atmosphere and stuff there wasn't much of a fireball


11 dimensions, in a donut, or is it just nine , I can never remember all this 2D stuff.

Well what with the complete vaccum of space, I would have thought you would get an implosion.

Matt Holck

parrallel unviverses rob my sense of porpose

in one universe I fail
bit in another I succede
in one universe I fail
bit in another I succede

what's the point
spliced in pieces

Reku

senordingdong wrote:

Well what with the complete vaccum of space, I would have thought you would get an implosion.

Implosion = force travels towards the centre of the event =>object caves in upon itself, usual goal for building demolition.
Explosion = force travels out from the centre of the event =>object particles fly outwards, away from the centre, usual goal for frag weapons.

So with space being a vacuum and so pulling everything outwards you'd be more likely to get an explosion.

Matt Holck

space doesn't pull
high presure pushes into lower presure

Capt'n Midnight

Matt Holck wrote:

space doesn't pull
high presure pushes into lower presure

yeah right :rolleyes:
you probably believe that light bulbs emit light when in reality they suck dark

Reku

Matt Holck wrote:

space doesn't pull
high presure pushes into lower presure

Since you want to argue semantics: Pressure doesn't push, forces do.

somuj

But the real question is: Where does the dark go when the light comes on?

I personaly believe that it goes under the bed cause if you look under the bedit is always dark.

Matt Holck

cinamatics would be great for showing how each gas molecule bounce off each other and out into a vacuum

and I thought the socks get lost in the sheets
and they were actually gloves
and how am I supposed to relate to the washing machine?

Capt'n Midnight

somuj wrote:

But the real question is: Where does the dark go when the light comes on?

I personaly believe that it goes under the bed cause if you look under the bedit is always dark.

another one who doesn't under stand fiziks :rolleyes:

the dark gets sucked in to the "light" bulb.

Dark isn't very heavy but it has a measurable mass, this is why dark suckers are normally termed light bulbs, because they are as light as they will ever get, when a "light" bulb is full, you can usually see some of the dark inside it, and the bulb will then be technically a "heavy" bulb*. The word bulb gets used because it's still a bulb when it's full, whereas it's only a sucker until it's full. And yes darkness isn't even, that's why sometimes bulbs fill up before you think they should.

* yes I know some people call them lamps :rolleyes:

Matt Holck

could you drain a bulb by changing the AC voltage to CA?

Capt'n Midnight

interesting but I don't think it would work because darkness is a bit like other fundamental particals. IIRC there was some truth about the strangeness of the up/down spin that had beauty and charm it. One of those duality ( or octality ) things. You might get anti-dark, but that is only a theory as no anti-dark particles have detected experimentally. Photons are considered by some to be the inverse of a darkon, but this this is as absurd as saying that since positrons are the opposite of electrons they should be repelled by gravity, which of course they aren't. Each darkon is capable of masking out only one color of background light, corresponding to that darkon's frequency. "Blackness" means being surrounded in a sea of darkons, all at different frequencies which cover a continuous spectrum of all the frequencies one can see. Changing to CA would involve a barn load of positrons but regardless of whether positrons or electrons or holes or bumps (anti-holes) were the majority carrier, you would still be able to apply Fleming's left hand rule based on the direction of "conventional" current.

somuj

Darkons, interesting.

That could be an alternate explanation for black holes.

Instead of a big fat star that fell in on top of itself and started to suck up all the light, it could also be explained by a dark matter star that fell out and is pegging darkons all over the place, hence we cannot see it. But as for the abnormal gravitational effects...... will have to come back to that one.