Question thread!

[Sinspawne]

I saw this type of thread on another site and thought it would be a good idea to bring it here, since it was a great success over there
OK, here is how it works: You can not post a new question until the one before is answered correctly/properly.


Guess I'll go first then.. *thinking hard*
Ok I've got one! Can an astronomical amount be meassured?! :?

Edit: Not an "astronomical unit" but an amount/quantity that is "astronomical"

 

[blessed]

Do you mean quantity (sorry, i dont get this cause my bioligy teacher beat into me "amount" is not a word)

 

[Sinspawne]

Amount is the sum total of two or more sums or quantities. Amount is quantity.
Not sure what your teacher is smoking, but can I have some? jk

 

[blessed]

hehe, what WAS he smoking... i don't know, but he was pretty insane, throwing stuff around the room if you got something wrong (especially if you said amount), spilling his countless cups of coffee on purpose... you know; mad stuff.

anyways, if its just big amount of something, then yeah, why not?
given that people agree on what an "astronomical amount" is.
it just requires technology, and that will evolve, if need be, to meassure the astronomical.

 

[WyteAnjal]

here are some answers I got from the web

astronomic unit 窶 length 窶 AU: ﾂｧ28
Of enormous magnitude; immense:
Entry: astronomic
Function: adjective
Definition: large
Synonyms: enormous

Century's Progress in Science, quotes Prof. Serviss: that the average parallax of a star, which is an ordinary astronomic quantity, is "about equal to the apparent distance between two pins, place one inch apart, and viewed from a distance of one hundred and eighty miles."

and one more

astronomic
big, large - above average in size or number or quantity or magnitude or extent; "a large city"; "set out for the big city"; "a large sum"; "a big (or large) barn"; "a large family"; "big businesses"; "a big expenditure"; "a large number of newspapers"; "a big group of scientists"; "large areas of the world"

Is that the right answer LOL

 

[Sinspawne]

I think Blessed has the best answer so far.

As far as I know, something astronomical can't be measured because the word is used with sizes/quantities so large that they seem unlimited.
But I wasn't sure..And still isn't...


Does anyone have something they've been wondering about? Just post a new question since the first one is a bit too hard to answer

 

[Winter]

It actually seems like a trick question.

Astronomical is more or less, just a word used to describe a theoretical amount. Its like saying 'big' without saying it.

Anyway, the space in kilometers from our star to the star Sirius, is 'astronomical'. But that is just used to describe that it is 'a large amount'. Even in lightyears, the distance is 'astronomical'.

So the term astronomical isnt a level of distance or amount, as much as it is a catagory of various measures of distance and amount classification. In other words, the term 'astronomical' technically cant be measured, because the nature of the word itself doesnt specify in what aspect to measure.

I guess, asking if astronomical can be measured is like asking how many inches are in 'large'. I think...

Next question; if the 19th century, people travelled 6 mph. *horse carriages* and in the beginning of the 20th century we can travel 60 mph, while in the 21st century we can travel easily borderline mach one *roughly 600 mph; not including our records of travelling in excess of mach 2-3 with jets like the X-15, the modestly outdated SR-71 Blackbird, and its various counterparts* in approx. what century will humanity systematically reach the speed of light/how many years will it take to reach that level?

 

[Glenn]

I guess, asking if astronomical can be measured is like asking how many inches are in 'large'. I think...

This reminds me of the Japanese number 無量大数, which is 10^68, and literally means "unmeasureable large number." Of course, there are larger numbers than that, so I think that that appellation is kind of funny.

Next question; if the 19th century, people travelled 6 mph. *horse carriages* and in the beginning of the 20th century we can travel 60 mph, while in the 21st century we can travel easily borderline mach one *roughly 600 mph; not including our records of travelling in excess of mach 2-3 with jets like the X-15, the modestly outdated SR-71 Blackbird, and its various counterparts* in approx. what century will humanity systematically reach the speed of light/how many years will it take to reach that level?

Well, assuming that this is merely a math question, and not one of how much more difficult it will be to develop the technology to travel at the speed of light, I would say that it would be in the first third of the 23rd century. I hope I did that math right.

Alright, next question: why do hot dogs come in packs of eight and hot dog buns come in packs of twelve?

 

[jeisan]

to get your money, trick you into buying more of one or the other.
unless you get 3 packs of hot dogs and 2 packs of buns then it all works out.

next question why does -3 x -3 = 9?
how can you start out with less than nothing multiply it by more less than nothing and get something?

 

[Glenn]

to get your money, trick you into buying more of one or the other.
unless you get 3 packs of hot dogs and 2 packs of buns then it all works out.

next question why does -3 x -3 = 9?
how can you start out with less than nothing multiply it by more less than nothing and get something?

That's just theoretical and abstract thinking. It comes from the addition of positive and negative numbers, from travelling forward and backwards, etc., or at least I would imagine that it does. I think that it makes more sense to think of it as points on a line than to think of it as quantity.

Next (sticking with math this time): who came up with the idea of i, the "imaginary number," and how the hell can you just pull something like that out of thin air?

 

[Winter]

Well, assuming that this is merely a math question, and not one of how much more difficult it will be to develop the technology to travel at the speed of light, I would say that it would be in the first third of the 23rd century. I hope I did that math right.

Actually, it was a bit of an unintended trick question..

I was adding systematically by mph. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second, not hours. Did you make sure to equate that variable? hehehehehe...

 

[blessed]

the reason why -3*-3 is 9 is because:
the nth root of any number has to have n number of solution solutions. so, for the second root of 9, two solutions are needed. if there are a million roots of a number, there must be a million numbers from which that number can be attained if the number is "millionthed".

if you want the theory, here goes.
you need n number of solutions for n roots that will create symmetry on an Argand diagram (2 dimensional space with complex and real number axes. on an argand diagram, the x axis are the real numbers, anything to the left of the y axis (imaginary axis), the numbers are negative) meaning the angle between solutions must be equal (eg 90 degrees in the second root) and the length of the line, say from -3 or 3 to 0, from the origin must equal to the nth root of a number.

eg. the third roots of 1 are: 1, and -0.5+iroot1.5 and -0.5-iroot1.5. (if you have a calculator that can do this, try it, you''l get one in all three cases).

(this is the stuff most people dont get taught and so such questions why -3*-3=9 arise. (my opinion)

there's just a need for these things. so they exist. In my opinion, negative numbers aren't the wierd ones, its i that gets scary.

umm. i doubt that explained much...

(does this mean I get to post a question? (this is NOT the question I want to post ))

 

[Glenn]

Actually, it was a bit of an unintended trick question..

I was adding systematically by mph. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second, not hours. Did you make sure to equate that variable? hehehehehe...

D'oh! And I was thinking to myself, "don't forget that it's miles per second and not miles per hour," but I forgot anyway. Oh well.

Winter - 1
Glenn - 0

(does this mean I get to post a question? (this is NOT the question I want to post ))

Sure, after that explanation.

 

[sky888]

Will the sun stop burning some day?

 

[Glenn]

Yes.

(defers next question to someone else)

 

[blessed]

hmm... question...
umm, if you hang a rope between two points, what shape does it make if left hanging. :?

 

[Sinspawne]

If the rope is attached between 2 points but slack enough to be hanging, then the rope would bend in a "U" shape towards the center of the planet...


Question: Why do electrical transformers hum :?

 

[blessed]

not the correct answer.

 

[Sinspawne]

Assuming the points are vertical, it would have the shape of a straight line.
It would still have the same shape if it's hung from 1 end or both ends.

But the answer could be anything depending on the angle of the two points and where along the rope it's hung...and how taut it is, if it's hung from both ends..

If it's not a riddle, could you rephrase the question?

 

[blessed]

well, the question is not inaccurately phrased. "flacid" rope, hanging, what shape?

doesn't matter about the angle, there is a name for the shape it makes.

 

[Glenn]

Um, I'm going to guess "fallic." Am I off base?

 

[blessed]

oh well, i guess no one knows... i can give the answer if someone wants...

( someone else can ask a question, I am incapable of doing so myself mostly )

 

[Lina Inverse]

Why is the banana bent?

 

[Sinspawne]

Because it grows in a cluster of other bananas, and it's so cramped that it has to grow that way.


Question: Why do electrical transformers hum?

 

[jovial_jon]

Because they can't remember the words to the song.

(Just ignore me, I'm being silly. )