Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

this belongs in the physics forum

Originally posted by PVS
this belongs in the physics forum It would, wouldn't it?

There's a physics thread? I couldn't find one.

Originally posted by ThePittman
There's a physics thread? I couldn't find one.

Nah, he was joking...cause he's old.

Pretty much. You could petition for a Physics forum to be created though.

Originally posted by Alliance
Pretty much. You could petition for a Physics forum to be created though.

Boba Fett has a freaking nice body.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, he was joking...cause he's old.

this belongs in the "don't attempt to break my balls until you grow some hair on yours, junior" forum

Originally posted by Bardock42
Boba Fett has a freaking nice body.


http://images.killermovies.com/forums/moresmilies/drool.gif

Originally posted by Bardock42
Boba Fett has a freaking nice body.

Yes he does.

Originally posted by PVS
this belongs in the "don't attempt to break my balls until you grow some hair on yours, junior" forum

Haha, that's funny, I think I will use that joke for a long time while you already rot in a cold dark grave.

Originally posted by Alliance
Yes he does.

Hmm, i am thinking, it might be Jango Fett, since Boba is severely burned if I remember my Star Wars education.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Haha, that's funny, I think I will use that joke for a long time while you already rot in a cold dark grave.

Harsh...oh so harsh.


Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, i am thinking, it might be Jango Fett, since Boba is severely burned if I remember my Star Wars education.

It acutally is Jango's helmet. I'm not picky over details...its the concept in general that matters.

Were did you find the pic of my torso?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Haha, that's funny, I think I will use that joke for a long time while you already rot in a cold dark grave.

nonsense. even assuming that we both live to our full life expectancies, and that i choose to be buried, you will also be long dead by the time i have decomposed

Originally posted by PVS
nonsense. even assuming that we both live to our full life expectancies, and that i choose to be buried, you will also be long dead by the time i have decomposed I'll just start to rot when you die.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Were did you find the pic of my torso?

its not you...

Originally posted by Alliance
its not you... crybaby

Originally posted by PVS
nonsense. even assuming that we both live to our full life expectancies, and that i choose to be buried, you will also be long dead by the time i have decomposed

Nah, I am immortal.

Also you start to rot the second you are dead....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, I am immortal.

Also you start to rot the second you are dead....

and what if i choose mummification? then i will be intact long after every last molecule of you is expelled from the anuses of worms

Originally posted by PVS
and what if i choose mummification? then i will be intact long after every last molecule of you is expelled from the anuses of worms

Stop using your superiour knowledge, which you were only able to gather because you are old, to argue agaisnt me.

Originally posted by jaden101
the speed of light is relative isnt it...for example if you are travelling at the speed of light and you shine a light ahead of you...it still travels away from you at the speed of light...in essence it would be going twice the speed of light even though it would going at the same rate

That's the thign though, it would not be going twice the speed of light.

Originally posted by jaden101
the speed of light is relative isnt it...for example if you are travelling at the speed of light and you shine a light ahead of you...it still travels away from you at the speed of light...in essence it would be going twice the speed of light even though it would going at the same rate

I don't think so. I'm just confused though. I'll go back to biology.

Originally posted by Alliance
I don't think so. I'm just confused though. I'll go back to biology.

actually i'm worng...i just looked it up...while the light would take just over half the time to reach a point X from a ship travelling just under the speed of light compared with that of a light shined from a stationary object....it is the time that is relative and not the speed of light

because the time measurement changes...when you do the calculation for each light source...the speed of light ends up the same

Originally posted by jaden101
actually i'm worng...i just looked it up...while the light would take just over half the time to reach a point X from a ship travelling just under the speed of light compared with that of a light shined from a stationary object....it is the time that is relative and not the speed of light

because the time measurement changes...when you do the calculation for each light source...the speed of light ends up the same yes

Originally posted by jaden101
actually i'm worng...i just looked it up...while the light would take just over half the time to reach a point X from a ship travelling just under the speed of light compared with that of a light shined from a stationary object....it is the time that is relative and not the speed of light

because the time measurement changes...when you do the calculation for each light source...the speed of light ends up the same

Cool. I thought the answer was more along these lines.

I remeber that from this show that I watched years ago and the example of thowing a ball on a plane and a flashlight.

Well, i just knew that current Theory states that light is not relative...meaning...no mater what, you always measure it as "c."

I though it was C-ya

no. its a little "c"

c

c

a curly c not a kicking k

no kidding, right?

Apparently so