this is assuming the bags are on the bus, which was not necessarily a given..

are the bags on the bus?

if not, 14.

Buses have wheels not legs/10990

The riddle didn't say a bus driver was ON the bus. The bus driver was in taking a leak and wasn't on the bus.

there is a depressing amount of DUMB in this world...


If your 747 is in your said mud, will it move?

Ok I will put my 2 cents in.

The bullet question represents more of a math discussion than science. All linear transformations can be described by the two independent normal basis transformations. And in this case both bullets have the same force field, g, applied in the vertical direction representing one basis and the fired bullet has an additional momentum vector along the horizontal axis representing the other independent basis. And to the degree that you align actions along different basis directions you will have independent consequences. But along the same basis they will be the same. This is straight out of vector or matrix or linear algebras. Not so much science except to note what forces or momentum is aligned with what basis.

As far as the plane question, somewhere along the discussion, the "plane don't fly" gang stated that momentum and forces where not part of the problem. That speed was the only concern. So that the speed of the jet and the treadmill canceled out leaving no airspeed for lift. And yet in order to get lift anytime, whether in this scenario or just everyday flight, you have interjected forces and momentum. You can't ignore this then with the jet engines and that system of transfer of forces and momentum and just look at speeds and then talk about flight and use forces and momentum to describe how flight would or would not take place. After all MOMENTUM is what is conserved, not speed in science, in the real world. Therefore while you can create a system in which your premise is correct, it is not part of the science and this world AT ANY SCALE. So the jet takes off in this universe.

So next are the the questions concerning Special Relativity and General Relativity involving speed of light and Black Holes respectively. I would like to point people to my discussion with patteu about Copernican vs Ptolemian representations of the solar system. I made part of my arguments concerning Einstein's theories on the GPS representing a test of Special Theory and Atomic Clocks at different gravitational fields proving the validity of General Relativity.

So for the question of what will be the speed of light emitted from some object traveling close the speed of light, the answer "that the speed will be the speed of light" is not complete. You must go on to say that the speed measured from the near light speed object as well as an earth bound observer both will see the same speed for the light. This being the case, the independent observers will not see the same distances and times that the other observers note for each other. Leading to the lack of being able to agree upon a unit of measure in distance or alignment of clocks. However both observers will agree that ds^2=d-ct^2 + dx^2 +dy^2 +dz^2 which is an analogue for pythagorean distance that includes time as a negative component of distance.

As far as the Black Hole, Baby Lee's description of both views of two observers, one outside and the falling inside observer, are actually the view and only the view of the outside observer. They would see the stretching of the falling object at the event horizon and such. The actual falling observer would not even notice he passed through the event horizon. He would feel no forces (ignoring tidal forces say by having so large of black hole that the event horizon is essentially flat). He is in free fall and as such is not subject to gravitational forces. Acceleration and gravity being the same. The stars would still twinkle above and the black hole would still be black though it would be getting bigger blocking out some stars in its direction.

That is all for now.

E=mc²

There are 5 gallons of AIR.

Holy crap this thread went on forever last night. I believe it is time for a new question.

Okay:

Do you already know the answer?

Yes, because I cheated. I definitely did not figure this out on my own.

My only guess is that someone with lets say blue eyes, sees someone counting the amount of people with blue eyes (they can tell that person is counting the people with blue eyes because they themselves can see those people have blue eyes), and they see themselves getting grouped in with that count.

Otherwise, I have no clue.

Nope.

Ok, I just read the answer. There was no way I was getting that. We have some smart minds on here, but I really doubt anyone gets it.

You're not completely on the wrong track though.

Perhaps the most important aspect is the specific [and complete] wording of the question.

Okay, I'm guessing this is an easier one.

I haven't read the answer to it, so I am playing along too.

A man who lives on the tenth floor takes the elevator down to the first floor every morning and goes to work. In the evening, when he comes back; on a rainy day, or if there are other people in the elevator, he goes to his floor directly. Otherwise, he goes to the seventh floor and walks up three flights of stairs to his apartment.
Can you explain why?
(This is one of the more popular and most celebrated of all lateral thinking logic puzzles. It is a true classic. Although there are many possible solutions that fit the conditions, only the canonical answer is truly satisfying.)

I think I already figured it out.

Short. Umbrella.

He hopes to see the woman at the next funeral.

You are in a room with no metal objects except for two iron rods. Only one of them is a magnet.
How can you identify which one is a magnet?

What?

Because he is sleeping with a girl on the 7th floor who happens to have broken windows that lets in a lot of rain. He doesn't want anyone to know this so he won't get off on the 7th when people are in the elevator with him. And he doesn't want to get wet.

He doesn't attempt to get back on the elevator after doing the deed, because the stairs are very close to her room, and he would otherwise have to go down a long hallway.

That's not so much a logic question as a magnetic properties question.

I'd say that there's a chick he likes to watch who sunbathes on the 7th floor, but he doesn't want other people to know. And she's only out when it's not raining.

I found it on a logic website, i cant figure it out, and this thread started as a physics thread in the first place.

Magnets have poles. Touch the end of one to the center of the other. If it sticks, the center touched is the plain iron and the end touched is the magnet. If the end touched tries to deflect to one end or the other of the center touched, the center touched is the magnet and the end touched is the plain iron.

Hey. Figure mine out.

I already cheated and read the answer.

If you're talking to me, I think my clue to MCJ indicates that I've figured it out, though I'll be glad to express it if you wish.

If you're not, disregard

Sorry if a repost.

I know when the blue-eyed folks leave, but it doesn't seem that the others would ever leave.

No.


http://www.jetphotos.net/news/media/...0866175100.jpg


United Parcel Service (Atlanta and Louisville) DC-8-73F N806UP (msn 46006) ran off the runway Thursday night while attempting takeoff from Greensboro-Piedmont Triad Airport (GSO), North Carolina. Just after 11:30pm, the package freighter was commencing a flight to the Louisville hub when the jet departed the right side of the runway, becoming stuck in the mud. The NTSB is investigating.

Photo: The UPS DC-8 is seen in the mud at GSO (Photo Copyright L. Gustavo Oliveira)

http://www.jetphotos.net/news/index....&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

http://www.uspermafrost.org/gallery/...ane1_small.jpg


DC-3 stuck in the mud on the Isachsen runway. Five Twin Otter flights were required to bring the equipment and people into Isachsen. The DC-3 was planned to reduce the number of Twin Otter flights required on the return trip, but this proved to be a mistake. During the days prior to this picture, the previously dry runway had developed wet patches due to water wicking up from the permafrost table. This condition went unnoticed until the DC-3 tried to turn on a soft spot. Once the plane was stuck, vibration from the engines caused the wheels to sink deeper until they contacted the permafrost table.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...a%3DN%26um%3D1



Many, many more. I'm amazed you even asked - you're right, there is a depressing amount of DUMB in this world...

http://images.google.com/images?hl=e...tart=0&ndsp=18

so, are you really saying that if they fired up the JET engines, those planes won't move an inch?

This what you came up with

I think you're a day late. Read your rep for why.

[edit] Then again, you may be counting the first ferry as day 2 (since it's at midnight), in which case we are in agreement.

Yes , you have to be correct. I was thinking the same thing more along the lines of,

IF I was jacking off a boar with one hand and jerking myself with the other and the boars velocity was 15 feet per second and mine was 10 feet per second would they really land at the same time ?

Yes. But as far as I can tell, none of the remaining folks have any way of telling what color eyes they have.

What new information does the Guru give everyone?

I think I learned that when I was like 8 yrs old.

Heres one for ya.

When you see ducks flying in a V, you know why one side is always longer than the other??


Because it has more ducks in it.

No hes not correct. It just means that the ball will have traveled further before it hits the ground. Unless you change the trajectory, the ball is going to fall to the earth at the same speed. More FPS does not change when the ball hits the ground in its fight against gravity.

Interesting, I've heard a lot about relativity, but I guess I'd never heard Einstein's precise 'a ha!' moment.
According to Radiolab, he was thinking on looking back at the second hand on a clock as he accelerated to the speed of light. And he realized that, while for someone at rest the clock swept at an even pace, for the accelerating person the sweep would slow, coming to a complete stop at the speed of light. And that hand would never move again [for him] so long as he travelled at the speed of light.

I had to bump this.

This thread is worthless without... oh, god, did I really go there?

If anyone can explain this to me in plain english, I'll rep the shit out of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%...Tarski_paradox

Why the **** did you even look this up?

I've known about it for years, but I've never understood it. I thought somebody here might have some insight.

That's just depressing, really.

I just want to say:
F=MA
We use that every day.

Mathematics: Not necessarily applicable to the real world.

Here is what i can tell you about it. EA and their football games have no clue how to implement them properly in their football games. lol

I found the answer:

http://www.mopo.ca/uploaded_images/five-729113.jpg

I was just researching the Taos Hum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hum

Pretty crazy.

Bump

In the 1920’s two mathematicians proved a very interesting but at the same time very puzzling theorem, known as the Banach-Tarski Paradox. In plain English, the theorem states that it is possible to divide a solid ball into a few pieces and reassemble those pieces together to make two balls, each of which has the same size as the original ball that was divided. A more striking consequence of their theorem is (you may want to sit down before you read this) a solid ball the size of a small pea can be cut into a number of pieces and reassembled into a new ball the size of the sun! Strange as it may sound, it is a valid mathematical argument, not a myth. (We have to note that it is not something one can do at home using a knife and a cutting board, because some of the pieces have no volume!) The analogy that we would like to establish under SMT is to map that solid ball of the theorem to a small amount of water which could quench the thirst of an army of about 30,000 in Tabuk in year 631. This was a miracle given to Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. A similar miracle of Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, is described in the Bible, Matthew 14:21 (Volker Runde, in the Sky 2 (2000), 13–15).

I think the zero-volume pieces are the key.

HOW IS THIS EVEN POSSIBLE

I'll take that rep, please. Mr. Li explains it very well.