Vlad the Impaler 19,599 12
02/27/2002 03:15 PM

What colors do the gab girls nipples come in?

The Mad Sipper 63 11
02/27/2002 03:16 PM

Helium has a lower density than air.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat. 182 13
02/27/2002 03:17 PM

What's the answer to this question?

Dirk Lately 14,001 13
02/27/2002 03:17 PM

Why isn't somebody writing down everything I say?

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 03:17 PM

Damn, beaten by Maha.



I even knew this one.



Lower density (relative to normal air) causes the timbre to change.

HisBoyElroy 10,621 13
02/27/2002 03:18 PM

warning: unrelated



my friend has a theory. all girls are either 1s or 10s when you first meet them. as you get to know them, they all approach 5.

+18Chickens 286,208 61
02/27/2002 03:19 PM

How do self locking lug nuts work?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:19 PM

How does superstring theory attempt to produce a unified theory of reality?

Our Miss Brookie 0 0
02/27/2002 03:20 PM

What does Squeamie look like nekkid?

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 03:20 PM

By proposing that all matter and energy are "strings" which are m-dimensional, but can be observed in 3 spatial dimensions.

Crickette 2,472 12
02/27/2002 03:21 PM

Unfortunately, Brooke, some of us already know parts of the answer to that question.



twitches

EvilPanda 4,807 13
02/27/2002 03:21 PM

Why are straight men so threatened by gay men?

Chances are no self-respecting gay man would have anything to do with you, anyway, so why the hangup?

Merkin 10,008 13
02/27/2002 03:21 PM

start reading, Scoot

Dirk Lately 14,001 13
02/27/2002 03:22 PM

There's no such thing as a "self-respecting gay man".

postbear 10,158 13
02/27/2002 03:22 PM

why don't more people kill themselves?

Merkin 10,008 13
02/27/2002 03:23 PM

Why do I insist on doing ANYTHING but real work while at "work?"

EvilPanda 4,807 13
02/27/2002 03:23 PM

There's no such thing as a "self-respecting gay man"



Spoken like a true homophobic breeder boy.

Merkin 10,008 13
02/27/2002 03:24 PM

where can I score some black market white babies?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:24 PM

Why do gay men think they're so threatening?

postbear 10,158 13
02/27/2002 03:24 PM

there's no such thing as a straight man here, either.



unfortunately.

sparkythewonderdog 2,144 12
02/27/2002 03:30 PM

What is the nature of the relationship between Marshall Dillon and Miss Kitty?

The Dirty Vicar 17,446 13
02/27/2002 03:30 PM

Why do people exhale after I leave the room?

Dirk Lately 14,001 13
02/27/2002 03:30 PM

Today I told a gay man I love him, because I do, and he got really really quiet.





What?

Vlad the Impaler 19,599 12
02/27/2002 03:31 PM

Elroy, it sounds like your friend ripped of Gordon's Principle of Convergence, developed in the late 1700's. But Vlad could be wrong!

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:31 PM

Dirk, gay men are incapable of love.

Stinky 7,952 12
02/27/2002 03:31 PM

Where's the beef?

The Dirty Vicar 17,446 13
02/27/2002 03:33 PM

How come no one says "WOOOWWIIEEEEE!" any more?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:33 PM

What is twistor theory?

The Dirty Vicar 17,446 13
02/27/2002 03:34 PM

I'm a Frost, am I not?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:34 PM

What is it about the detection of quantum particles that makes them behave differently from undetected quantum particles?

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 03:36 PM

That only happens in cats.

Our Miss Brookie 0 0
02/27/2002 03:36 PM

Why does my 49-year-old boyfriend want to keep our relationship a secret?

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 03:36 PM

The same principle that makes un-closeted gays act differently than gays like Ford.

dr froglord 9,243 13
02/27/2002 03:37 PM

WOOOWWIIEEEEE!

HisBoyElroy 10,621 13
02/27/2002 03:39 PM

vlad, i'm not a mathematician, so i dunno what gpc says. but his theory is damn close to the squeeze theorem...whatever the actual name for that is.

dr froglord 9,243 13
02/27/2002 03:40 PM

Is the squeeze theorem the one that says that the more times you screw a woman, the better any other female looks?

Chaldron Urkel Hoodspinster, CPA 1,560 13
02/27/2002 03:42 PM

Who stole my socks?

+18Chickens 286,208 61
02/27/2002 03:45 PM

Why does a brand spanking new computer come with an outdated bios?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 03:46 PM

Who let the dogs out?



Who?

Who? Who?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:46 PM

why has only one of my questions been answered?

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 03:48 PM

How does superstring theory attempt to produce a unified theory of reality?



Apparently by coming up with five different string theories and then they want to try to unify those.



I'm starting to wonder if they shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water and start over on this Shakespeare.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 03:48 PM

Scooter, Werner Heisenberg posited that you cannot observe a thing without altering it.



Of course, he was a bit uncertain.

Stinky 7,952 12
02/27/2002 03:50 PM

Why does it hurt when I pee?

The Dirty Vicar 17,446 13
02/27/2002 03:52 PM

Why does my 17 year old girlfriend question my love?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 03:53 PM

by what is it about the observation that influences it?

sparkythewonderdog 2,144 12
02/27/2002 03:54 PM

Why do birds suddenly appear

Every time

You are near?

The Dirty Vicar 17,446 13
02/27/2002 03:56 PM

That must be terribly inconvenient.



"I love you and all, but stay the hell away. I just had this suit dry cleaned."

HisBoyElroy 10,621 13
02/27/2002 03:58 PM

"...and i just washed my car, so you're not riding with me."

sparkythewonderdog 2,144 12
02/27/2002 04:00 PM

How many roads must a man walk down before you can call him a man?

HisBoyElroy 10,621 13
02/27/2002 04:00 PM

4

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 04:01 PM

You can determine either the position or the momentum of an object as accurately as you like, but the act of doing so makes your measurement of the other property that much less.



Observing an object collapses its wave function.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 04:01 PM

42

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 04:03 PM

I ejaculate Bose-Einstein condensates.

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 04:04 PM

If a computer did the observation and stored the information on hard disc, but no one ever looked at the data the computer had gathered, would the it still have the same effect as if a person had observed it?

Stinky 7,952 12
02/27/2002 04:07 PM

How did Charles become in charge?

Cap'n Stuby 17,826 13
02/27/2002 04:08 PM

What is the psychological problem that makes me meet people online and then lie to them that I'm a 49-year-old Vietnam vet that runs his own security business?

HisBoyElroy 10,621 13
02/27/2002 04:09 PM

he overthrew clarence, who was in control.

sparkythewonderdog 2,144 12
02/27/2002 04:09 PM

Green Door, what is that secret you hide?

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 04:12 PM

If a computer did the observation and stored the information on hard disc, but no one ever looked at the data the computer had gathered, would the it still have the same effect as if a person had observed it?



In that context it's exactly the same question as "if a tree falls in the woods." The answer is yes, but it could be no if the thing in question was small enough and didn't interact with anything else (that interaction is what collapses the wave function).

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 04:14 PM

then it is the observation tool that alters the behavior, not the observation itself?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 04:18 PM

Let's start by assuming that the Schrodinger's Cat example is utter bullShakespeare. Just because you don't know what happened to the cat until you look into the box doesn't mean that the outcome has already occurred.



The act of measuring something steals energy from it. In the case of Schrodinger's cat, the Geiger counter is the detector. So even though the average value of the probability function is .5 the event is complete.



You can also measure gross phenomena without impacting it by looking at a secondary effect. You can measure electrical current by measuring the electromagnetic field that it generates. You can tell when an electron changes quantum levels by detecting the photon that it emits.



I think that in the case of quantum particles, scientists assume that the quanta are the smallest building blocks; so there is no secondary effect that does not impact the quanta. Current research points to even smaller components so this supposition may be incorrect.

dr froglord 9,243 13
02/27/2002 04:18 PM

When a woman observes my tool, the observation changes the tool and the change in the tool changes the observation....













usually the observation ends with them running screaming from the room.

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 04:18 PM

Don't think of observation as an awareness thing. The act of observing also means interacting in some way. Bouncing a particle off. That interaction is what fixes the outcome, and also represents your observation.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 04:30 PM

Now make with some clicks biotch!

Professor Nutbutter 181,255 35
02/27/2002 04:33 PM

Why do I find myself falling in love with Sparkythewonderdog?

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 04:37 PM

Although now that I think about it, I'm not so sure. It depends on what context of observation you mean.



Here's a freak-ass fact that has been experimented on for a hundred years.



You know about the double-slit experiment. You shine a polarized light through two parallel slits, and you get interference patterns on the wall, as the polarized photons interfere with each other.



Now, if you cut the emission of light down to a single photon at a time, you have nothing to interfere with, right? One particle goes through one slit or the other and hits the wall. End of story. But in fact, if you do just one photon at a time, you still get the interference patterns even though there is nothing to interfere with.



And it gets even freakier. Say you want to try to figure out which slit that single photon went through. It's just one photon, right, it had to go through one or the other. So you set up some sort of detector on the other side of both slits that can detect which one the photon went through.



If you try to "nail down" nature like that, you stop getting the interference pattern. Any time you set it up so that even in principle you could determine which slit, then the interference pattern goes away with single photons. So in that sense, observation DOES control the outcome.



But only works at the quantum level.

Professor Nutbutter 181,255 35
02/27/2002 04:39 PM

God has a reason for it, I'm sure.

sparkythewonderdog 2,144 12
02/27/2002 04:39 PM

And Onion makes you cry, Nutbutter?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 04:40 PM

that's the exact experiment I was thinking of

SalsaShark 6,518 11
02/27/2002 04:40 PM

Ford, as i understand it, that sort of thing has to do with the concept that as the photons are traveling toward the target, each individual photon takes every possible path from the emitter (flashlight?) through the slits and to the wall/screen/whatever. like you pointed out, trying to quantify which precise path the photon takes changes all that.



it's freaky.

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 04:55 PM

And that's why Schrodinger's Cat isn't bullShakespeare. It really is both at the same time. Although since you could observe whether the cat was dead or not without resorting to opening the box, the experiment wouldn't really work. It's just a thought experiment.

SalsaShark 6,518 11
02/27/2002 04:56 PM

is that like the thought experiment at the beginning of "Ghostbusters?"



still comedic genius.

Ford Prefect 5,475 13
02/27/2002 04:57 PM

refresh my memory

0 0
02/27/2002 04:58 PM

This is simple.



How does superstring theory attempt to produce a unified

theory of reality?

+

What does Squeamie look like nekkid?

= answer.



They tye into each other perfectly!

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 05:01 PM

If you can't spell "tie" correctly, chances are everything else you have ever said is wrong.



Where's the "rule of thumnb" thread when you need it?

SalsaShark 6,518 11
02/27/2002 05:06 PM

ford:

bill murray is holding up cards to two subjects. one of them, they guy, guesses the shapes on the back correctly every time. the other one, a blonde babe, gets them wrong every time. bill murray acts like the babe is getting them all correct, and administers electrical shocks to the guy (who happens to be exhibiting extraordinary psychic abilities), just so he can score with the chick.



bill murray rules.



"Ray...when someone asks you if you're a god...you say 'yes.'"

The Dirty Vicar 17,446 13
02/27/2002 05:09 PM

"Helga, do you have some mayonnaise for my aufschnitt?"

Captain Skippy 41,253 13
02/27/2002 05:29 PM

In response to the Heisenberg/Quantum particle questions.



Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that you can never observe a subatomic particle or measure it without changing it because the a single photon of energy (smallest possible) is suffcient to alter that particle.



(ie- if your trying to track an electron using light and you hit it with one photon of light to measure its speed/vector you've just given it a new speed and vector because that single photon is suffcient to change it.)

sparkythewonderdog 2,144 12
02/27/2002 05:31 PM

Does the Pope wear a funny hat??



I dunno Glenn, I guess it is kinda funny.

Alienyst 2,371 12
02/27/2002 05:34 PM

If you have to crap, but can't because of not toilet, and there is bubble gum in your feces and the gas is building up inside, is it possible to manipulate the bowel in such a way that you can let the gas out into a gum bubble?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 05:57 PM

I don't think that's it, Skippy. It'd be easy to figure out mathematically what effect the photon is going to have and then mathematically remove that effect to determine what the vector either is or was before. I doubt it would've ever been made such a big deal of if the uncertainty principle is what you say it is.

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 05:59 PM

How can imaginary numbers ever be used to represent reality?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:10 PM

Because imaginary numbers are not imaginary. They are just an attempt to represent polar numbers in a rectangular system.



They are called imaginary because i is the equivalent of the square root of -1. Impossible in a cartesian world, but commonplace if you take phase shift into consideration.

Oscillometric Digital Blood Pressure Monitor 1,686 13
02/27/2002 06:13 PM

Daddy, would you like some sausage?

9,243 13
02/27/2002 06:14 PM

Set phase shift on stun.

Alienyst 2,371 12
02/27/2002 06:15 PM

Would that be Polish sausage or italian sausage?

Oscillometric Digital Blood Pressure Monitor 1,686 13
02/27/2002 06:16 PM

Polish.

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 06:30 PM

you can graph imaginary numbers in polar coordinates?

George Dubya Bush 8 11
02/27/2002 06:31 PM

r jenny mccarthys boobs real?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:32 PM

Yeah. i = radius 1 at 180 degrees.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:32 PM

Yes, but the stuff inside of them is fake.

Oscillometric Digital Blood Pressure Monitor 1,686 13
02/27/2002 06:36 PM

I did not know that 1bigdork. What are they filled with? Cream cheese?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:36 PM

A more formal definition:



The polar form of a complex number z = a + bi is this: z = r(cos(q) + isin(q)) , where r = |z| and q is the argument of z .

38,986 14
02/27/2002 06:37 PM

Math is hard.

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 06:38 PM

What is an example of using an imaginary number to model something real?

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 06:39 PM

Somebody is getting pissed that I ask a lot of math questions, I guess.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:39 PM

In my dreams they are filled with moonshine.

Oscillometric Digital Blood Pressure Monitor 1,686 13
02/27/2002 06:39 PM

If you were watersking, and you blew a flat tire, would it still take as many pancakes to cover a dog house?

Oscillometric Digital Blood Pressure Monitor 1,686 13
02/27/2002 06:40 PM

100th post! W007!!

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 06:40 PM

Modelling A/C circuits.

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 06:41 PM

How do you model an AC circuit?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:43 PM

A good example is AC electricity. The waves are best represented in polar coordinates, because they are sinusoidal. But mathematical operations on these waveforms are simpler if you convert them to rectangular coordinates (or into the Fourier domain).



Imaginary numbers make it easy to add or subtract or do matrix operations on things that have a phase component.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:44 PM

None, motorcycles don't have roll-down windows.

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 06:45 PM

Any electrical engineering problem involving AC circuits is just about impossible (especially if it involves multiple phases and/or impedance) w/o uing complex numbers.



Anything with vectors is usually easier w/complex numbers.



Beats the hell out of using all those damn cos's all over the place.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:45 PM

That was an odd simulpost.

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 06:47 PM

Your post was kind of in the middle of mine.

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 06:49 PM

Hi, I'm ELI the ICE man.



If you get that, you really are a dork.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 06:53 PM

In an AC system Voltage (E) leads Current (I) in an Inductor (L). Current leads Voltage across a capacator.



Today I am a dork.

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 06:56 PM

* touches 1BD on the shoulders with a slide rule *

5,580 13
02/27/2002 06:58 PM

That wasn't me!!!!

Captain Obvious 4 11
02/27/2002 07:00 PM

That's better.

Dr. Funkenstein 537 11
02/27/2002 08:57 PM

Why must I feel like that, why must I chase the cat?

Kizmet 85 12
02/27/2002 09:01 PM

why do people feel the needto replace s's with z's?

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:02 PM

zhut up, ztupid!

Only 97% as Feeble 32,400 15
02/27/2002 09:04 PM

Light behaves like both a wave, and a particle, whichever is convenient at the moment. This does screw with physicist's minds.



There are subatomic particles which are generated in pairs. Each member of the pair has a characteristic (I believe it's spin) which is determined ONLY when it is measured - that is, it's completely undetermined until then.



At the instant the one particle acquires a spin through the measuring thereof, the other member of the pair must, to conserve energy, INSTANTLY acquire the opposite spin.



This means that if you grab one member of the pair, travel 200000000 light years away, then observe it's spin, the information travels 200000000 / epsilon times the speed of light, which violates a whole lot of Special Relativity.



Einstein called this "Spooky action at a distance." I call it proof that we can travel faster than light

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:07 PM

Light behavez like both a wave, and a particle, whichever iz convenient at the moment. Thiz doez zcrew with phyzicizt'z mindz.



There are zubatomic particlez which are generated in pairz. Each member of the pair haz a characteriztic (I believe it'z zpin) which iz determined ONLY when it iz meazured - that iz, it'z completely undetermined until then.



At the inztant the one particle acquirez a zpin through the meazuring thereof, the other member of the pair muzt, to conzerve energy, INZTANTLY acquire the oppozite zpin.



Thiz meanz that if you grab one member of the pair, travel 200000000 light yearz away, then obzerve it'z zpin, the information travelz 200000000 / epzilon timez the zpeed of light, which violatez a whole lot of Zpecial Relativity.



Einztein called thiz "Zpooky action at a diztance." I call it proof that we can travel fazter than light

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:08 PM

Hehehe, if you say those z things out loud it sounds like Shelly from South Park.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 09:08 PM

"replace all" kickz azz

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 09:10 PM

How is it that "Diet Dr. Pepper tastes more like regular Dr. Pepper"?



MORE like regular Dr. Pepper than WHAT? Regular Dr. Pepper?! That's impossible. More like regular Dr. Pepper than Coke does? Well, duh! You don't drink friggin Coke if you want the cherry-vanilla goodness of the Doc.



It's a dumb fookin slogan. Their admen need a new editor in a really bad way.

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:12 PM

Zexhead, I thought it was dumb too until I tasted it, and then I said, "Hey, it really does taste more like Regular Dr Pepper!"

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 09:17 PM

Marketing-speak has nothing to do with clear communication.



They want you to think that it tastes more like regular Dr. Pepper than it used to. But to say it that way bashes the old product a bit. You know, the one that they spent 5 years telling you tastes just like regular.



And when is the last time that you ever used the word "zesty" in a conversation (non QTA GABbers only)? But there are about 1,000 zesty products in the supermarket.

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:18 PM

Don't you mean "sesty"?

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 09:20 PM

Heh.

LeVertGecko 0 0
02/27/2002 09:23 PM

I used the word zesty, just one day ago. I believe the phrase was: " that girl is a zesty latino honey I would like to get behind".



Booze+workplace=ticking harassment timebomb.

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 09:24 PM

Thanks, BigDork. For having to get all friggin smart and thoughtful and Shakespeare.



I was just... I was only... I just wanted to be funny dammit! And you had to go and ruin it by being logical!

Are you and Aushie in cahoots? She ruined my haiku-post before I even thought of it.

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:25 PM

Aha! I taunt you from the future!

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 09:29 PM

Sorry. I went to the dark side of marketing a few years ago. Combine that with my cynical nature, and I can disect any piece of marketing communications.



Aushie and I are not in cahoots, but I do want to have her babies.

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:30 PM

awww, nibblebuns!

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 09:31 PM

Stop it, Aushie! Just STOP!





Unless you give me a pack of Dunhills. Then it's okay.

aushie 5,580 13
02/27/2002 09:32 PM

I gave you some, but I ended up taking them away before I actually gave them to you because of something you're about to do.

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 09:40 PM

Hoom.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/27/2002 10:00 PM

To what extent?

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 10:02 PM

Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?



Col. Mustard. Murdered. 10 minutes ago. In the Library. He was frosting Mrs. Plum. With the candlestick.

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 10:03 PM

I should clarify that Col. Mustard was killed with the candlestick. Not frosting Mrs. Plum with it.

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 10:08 PM

Unless frosting Mrs. Plum with the candlestick gets me clickies.





In which case: do the backstroke in that there muddy water...

Squeamish 38,986 14
02/27/2002 10:12 PM

I'd give you clickies if you ever signed onto Yahoo Messenger

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 10:14 PM

wah wah wah!

Sexhead, Succubus-In-Training 12,287 12
02/27/2002 10:16 PM

Happy now?



Fookin crybaby.

Gimme damn clickies, bitch!

Declan (Now With Cookies) McManus 131,867 36
02/27/2002 10:22 PM

Why does my cat's breath smell like cat food?

Cap'n Stuby 17,826 13
02/27/2002 10:33 PM

I can;t answer math-related questions because I suck at math, even though there are millions of sites that reduce your physics questions to elementary pap.





I can only answer questions about biology, be it molecular or genetic. None of that ecology bullShakespeare, either. That's just lame.

Scooter Brown 19,936 13
02/27/2002 11:54 PM

that's the crappy thing about biology. It lets people who don't know how to work their brains call themselves scientists.

1bigdork 7,825 12
02/28/2002 12:33 AM

Sexhead, the first version was much funnier.

Dead Robot 67,630 16
02/28/2002 12:37 AM

Is it really 2?

postbear 10,158 13
02/28/2002 03:06 AM

what would jesus do?

Julio the Microbus driver! 13,428 12
02/28/2002 03:21 AM

Who would jesus do?