Author Topic: Top is in  (Read 746328 times)

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8372
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4500 on: May 15, 2019, 12:57:41 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

techwiz

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • Location: Ontario
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4501 on: May 15, 2019, 01:28:04 PM »


The singularity is in!

Wintergreen78

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 98
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4502 on: May 15, 2019, 02:07:44 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8429
  • Registered member
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4503 on: May 15, 2019, 02:57:25 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?

solon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1497
  • Age: 1818
  • Location: CO
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4504 on: May 15, 2019, 03:09:06 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?

No, dragoncar. I expect you to die.

ysette9

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4431
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • Insert Snappy Title Here (Journal)
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4505 on: May 15, 2019, 03:11:17 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?

No, dragoncar. I expect you to die.
Lol

ysette9

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4431
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • Insert Snappy Title Here (Journal)
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4506 on: May 15, 2019, 03:12:13 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Thy was pretty much how I did my undergrad in ChemE for all of the hairy second order differential terms in subjects like fluid dynamics: just assume something that makes them go to zero.

Exflyboy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5991
  • Age: 57
  • Location: Corvallis, Oregon
  • Expat Brit living in the New World..:)
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4507 on: May 15, 2019, 03:45:32 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Thy was pretty much how I did my undergrad in ChemE for all of the hairy second order differential terms in subjects like fluid dynamics: just assume something that makes them go to zero.

Damn why did't I think of that?

JAYSLOL

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1132
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4508 on: May 15, 2019, 09:00:37 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Thy was pretty much how I did my undergrad in ChemE for all of the hairy second order differential terms in subjects like fluid dynamics: just assume something that makes them go to zero.

The same way I assume The Top Is In and will go to zero.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8429
  • Registered member
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4509 on: May 15, 2019, 10:16:42 PM »
Iíve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.

Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames.  Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity.  Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. 

Entropic expansion is forever.  The top is never in.

I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Thy was pretty much how I did my undergrad in ChemE for all of the hairy second order differential terms in subjects like fluid dynamics: just assume something that makes them go to zero.

The same way I assume The Top Is In and will go to zero.

Just look at the chart upside down

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: AL
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4510 on: May 16, 2019, 10:53:43 AM »
The same way I assume The Top Is In and will go to zero.

Just look at the chart upside down

So it's going to go to negative zero?

mies

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4511 on: May 16, 2019, 11:01:55 AM »
The same way I assume The Top Is In and will go to zero.

Just look at the chart upside down

So it's going to go to negative zero?

At least. Probably more.

UnleashHell

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6057
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Florida
  • Chapter IV - A New ... er.. something
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4512 on: May 16, 2019, 11:30:02 AM »
The same way I assume The Top Is In and will go to zero.

Just look at the chart upside down

So it's going to go to negative zero?

At least. Probably more.

zero negative squared??? woot!!

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4513 on: May 16, 2019, 01:26:34 PM »
One of my co-workers today mentioned that the Andromeda galaxy is actually going to collide with our own, almost certainly obliterating our solar system and everything in it in about 4,500,000,000 years. We are all doomed! #galactictopisin

Cookie78

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1884
  • Location: Canada
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4514 on: May 16, 2019, 02:25:44 PM »
One of my co-workers today mentioned that the Andromeda galaxy is actually going to collide with our own, almost certainly obliterating our solar system and everything in it in about 4,500,000,000 years. We are all doomed! #galactictopisin

I heard that it will collide and the galaxies will merge together. There's enough space in between the stars that individual collisions are unlikely, but different gravitational forces will mix things up for another 3 billion years. Our solar system and planet will be ok, but our star charts will be out of date. Here's a simulation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4disyKG7XtU

Another video here
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2014/03/24/scientists-predict-our-galaxys-death/

Also top is in

DadJokes

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 390
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4515 on: May 16, 2019, 02:28:33 PM »
I am officially calling it. Top will be in sometime between now and 4.5 billion years from now when the two galaxies collide.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: AL
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4516 on: May 16, 2019, 03:24:23 PM »
I am officially calling it. Top will be in sometime between now and 4.5 billion years from now when the two galaxies collide.

I thought mergers and acquisitions were generally good for stockholders.

PDXTabs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 932
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4517 on: May 16, 2019, 03:31:38 PM »
I am officially calling it. Top will be in sometime between now and 4.5 billion years from now when the two galaxies collide.

You are very optimistic. The sun boil the oceans in ~800 million years.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: AL
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4518 on: May 16, 2019, 03:38:53 PM »
I am officially calling it. Top will be in sometime between now and 4.5 billion years from now when the two galaxies collide.

You are very optimistic. The sun boil the oceans in ~800 million years.

Sounds like a great source of renewable energy. 

BicycleB

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: Live Music Capital of the World
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4519 on: May 16, 2019, 06:17:59 PM »
The economy will explode after all that pesky water is out of the way. Top is in starting in 800,000,001 years.

aspiringnomad

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 786
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4520 on: May 16, 2019, 09:56:19 PM »
I'm holding out for the heat death of the universe, when I predict the entropy will be in.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13116
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4521 on: May 17, 2019, 07:35:50 AM »
I'm calling peak Game of Thrones in two days.

JAYSLOL

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1132
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4522 on: May 17, 2019, 07:42:08 AM »
I am officially calling it. Top will be in sometime between now and 4.5 billion years from now when the two galaxies collide.

I thought mergers and acquisitions were generally good for stockholders.

Good for stockholders maybe, not so good for competition.  What are we going to do when's there's only a handful of really big and powerful galaxies that contain everything?  Galactic Monopoly Is In. 

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: AL
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4523 on: May 17, 2019, 10:31:25 AM »
I am officially calling it. Top will be in sometime between now and 4.5 billion years from now when the two galaxies collide.

I thought mergers and acquisitions were generally good for stockholders.

Good for stockholders maybe, not so good for competition.  What are we going to do when's there's only a handful of really big and powerful galaxies that contain everything?  Galactic Monopoly Is In.

There are 100 billion galaxies so I think there will be plenty of competition.  If you don't like the newer bigger Milky Dromeda Galaxy you can stop by another.  There are even a few boutique galaxies within an easy 100,000 light year drive. 

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: AL
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4524 on: May 17, 2019, 11:34:32 AM »
So maybe posting here in this cohort will make it more official, I must keep my word and all that.

Yep -- Give us a date.  We'll put you on the list @tooqk4u22 and support and cheer you to the finish line.

I read some of your other posts, and it sounds like you know you're there financially.  You're posting here now, so it sounds like you want to FIRE.  So go ahead and take the first step -- name a date.  You can do it.

ETA -- batsignal out to @markbike528CBX -- the best anti-OMY coach around.  :)


I am tired of the BS, I am tired of the increasing bureaucracy, I am tired of sitting in an office, I am tired of being out of shape, I am just tired, and mostly I am just tired of being tired with everything.   F'ck it, I am out.  OMY be damned or in any event it will be later in life if it does happen.   I am going to throw caution to the wind and irresponsible F'ck up our lives.

This is a fair warning to everyone on this forum - dump your stocks today bc I am giving notice on Monday.   And sure as shootin' the market will likely crash moments after I do it to f'ck with me.   

This is your final warning GET OUT NOW BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!!!!!!!

Dire warning from @tooqk4u22.

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
Re: Top is in
« Reply #4525 on: May 17, 2019, 12:20:04 PM »
For some reason, my wife fired up youtube and we were waitching the "So Long, and thanks for all the fish" sequence from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Perhaps the dolphins are trying to get out before the sun boiling thing really starts up.