ForumGarden

Are you green? I know it's not easy being green....:wah::wah:

jimbo;1100517 wrote: ask our fave weirdo anything



ok i'll go first



what is the fourth dimension

The first dimension is a singularity, the second dimension is a direction from that singularity, the third dimension is a vector, and the fourth dimension is time.

is it string theory

No.

is it time travel

No.

is it inhabited by fourth deminsional beings that move backwards and forward through time unseen by 3 dimensional beings like us

No.

or is it something else :-3:-3:-3

Yes.


Hope that helps.

shelbell;1100552 wrote: Are you green? I know it's not easy being green....:wah::wah:


At the moment, I'm a very light brown on the upper side and very very light brown on the underside. My legs are almost white. In the summer, my upper side will be a darker brown from my elbows to my hands. My right arm will be darker brown than my left arm. The rest of me will be the same as in the winter.

OpenMind;1100633 wrote: At the moment, I'm a very light brown on the upper side and very very light brown on the underside. My legs are almost white. In the summer, my upper side will be a darker brown from my elbows to my hands. My right arm will be darker brown than my left arm. The rest of me will be the same as in the winter.


You didn't answer the question...is any part of you green?? :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

shelbell;1100638 wrote: You didn't answer the question...is any part of you green?? :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


Yes I did.

Ok. The soles of my feet are green with various shades of brown mixed in.:rolleyes:

OpenMind;1100642 wrote: Yes I did.

Ok. The soles of my feet are green with various shades of brown mixed in.:rolleyes:


:yh_bigsmi:yh_tong2:yh_bigsmi

black or red?:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Odie;1100656 wrote: black or red?:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


Black or red what?

Stop ya larfin' and make sense, woman.:yh_rotfl

Is your mind always open?

OpenMind;1100694 wrote: Black or red what?

Stop ya larfin' and make sense, woman.:yh_rotfl


it's a question for women, it's what colour their underwear is!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl



so what colour is yours?:sneaky::sneaky::guitarist:guitarist

along-for-the-ride;1100710 wrote: Is your mind always open?


No. Sometimes I have to shut it to prevent something despicable from entering.

Odie;1100713 wrote: it's a question for women, it's what colour their underwear is!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl





so what colour is yours?:sneaky::sneaky::guitarist:guitarist


What makes you think I'm a woman? Haven't ya seen the pictures of me on FG?



The ones I'm wearing or the ones in my drawer?

OpenMind;1100716 wrote: What makes you think I'm a woman? Haven't ya seen the pictures of me on FG?



The ones I'm wearing or the ones in my drawer?


good grief, I know your a man!:-5:-5

the question was for women, then I had asked you what colour underwear you wore!:-5:-5:-5

Odie;1100750 wrote: good grief, I know your a man!:-5:-5



the question was for women, then I had asked you what colour underwear you wore!:-5:-5:-5


Ah, right. Ok.

I'm not fussy, no one ever sees them.

Having said that, a long time ago when I was in the first year of my apprenticeship in early spring 1972, I'd got off the train at St. Pancras in London and started strolling to where I was stationed at the time. Faringdon I think it was. All casual with my hands in my pockets.

I'd just passed Kings Cross station. A couple of young lasses passed me in the opposite direction on their way to their places of work. At first it didn't bother me that they were giggling as young girlies were always giggling.

Then I felt a draught between my thighs and instantly remembered that the zip of my purple corduroys tended to fly low if I strained it by putting my hands in my pockets. I checked and there they were revealing my bright red underpants.

In hindsight, I reckon I was the forerunner for that fashion.

:yh_rotfl

Right. Anymore questions will be answered tomorrow as I'm going to hit the hay now.

Good night you inquisitive lot.

OpenMind;1100778 wrote: Ah, right. Ok.

I'm not fussy, no one ever sees them.

Having said that, a long time ago when I was in the first year of my apprenticeship in early spring 1972, I'd got off the train at St. Pancras in London and started strolling to where I was stationed at the time. Faringdon I think it was. All casual with my hands in my pockets.

I'd just passed Kings Cross station. A couple of young lasses passed me in the opposite direction on their way to their places of work. At first it didn't bother me that they were giggling as young girlies were always giggling.

Then I felt a draught between my thighs and instantly remembered that the zip of my purple corduroys tended to fly low if I strained it by putting my hands in my pockets. I checked and there they were revealing my bright red underpants.

In hindsight, I reckon I was the forerunner for that fashion.

:yh_rotfl


:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

what's a normal breakfast for you?

OpenMind;1100778 wrote: Ah, right. Ok.

I'm not fussy, no one ever sees them.

Having said that, a long time ago when I was in the first year of my apprenticeship in early spring 1972, I'd got off the train at St. Pancras in London and started strolling to where I was stationed at the time. Faringdon I think it was. All casual with my hands in my pockets.

I'd just passed Kings Cross station. A couple of young lasses passed me in the opposite direction on their way to their places of work. At first it didn't bother me that they were giggling as young girlies were always giggling.

Then I felt a draught between my thighs and instantly remembered that the zip of my purple corduroys tended to fly low if I strained it by putting my hands in my pockets. I checked and there they were revealing my bright red underpants.

In hindsight, I reckon I was the forerunner for that fashion.

:yh_rotfl


Sounds like your name should be OpenFly instead of OpenMind.

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Odie;1100905 wrote: what's a normal breakfast for you?


One that is easily eaten, doesn't complain and doesn't jump out of the bowl or platter.

shelbell;1100969 wrote: Sounds like your name should be OpenFly instead of OpenMind.



:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


It only happened the once.

I had to smile when I saw the Carribeans start to walk around like that over the last decade or so.

What is up with otters ? Its always about the otters with everyone. Otters this and otters that.....God !

Everytime I turn around someone is posting otter pictures and making up otter poems or telling some kind of crazy otter story.

Dont get me wrong, Im not anti otter. I dont think otters are the work of the devil and I dont belong to any of those down with otters or otters what are they good for groups your always hearing about.

Those guys are some real fanatics.

The thing is I cant spend my whole life worrying about them or checking up on them. Ive got my own problems. I think the otters will be just fine if I dont visit them or sing otter songs praising them....whatever.

Im sorry but I just had to get that out.

jimbo;1101167 wrote: the fourth



what do you think of this then oh wise buddy





The Fourth Dimension



Time Travel



10/2 - I just wanted to add a little something as to why I don't believe in time travel as most commonly connotated. Yesterday I said that it doesn't make sense because dimensions are not physical things. They only exist mathematically. Another thing is that time doesn't exist. Mathematically, time is a thing that can be measured by minutes, months, or millennia. But, in reality, time is nothing more than the passage of events, the motion of particles, the existance of anything. If everything stopped, then there would be no time. That is definately something to think about. If no clock ticked to mark the passage of time, and no event occured to differentiate this year from the last, then did time really progress? Or, did time stand still? Is time really what we think it is? When we talk of time travel, I feel that it is relative to position rather than events. In that sense, I feel that "time travel" may be a misnomer. I could be proven wrong, but for the time being I feel pretty certain about these things.


Ho ho. A trick question, eh?

We are constantly moving through time without any effort on our part. If we did not, we would be in freeze frame mode all the time. Therefore we are time travellers. However, we don't have a steering wheel, accelerator or brake.

While the guy writing the article above says that time doesn't exist, his argument clearly shows that time does exist. Time is affected by gravity and mass. This wouldn't be so if it didn't exist.

We can move forward through time at different rates relative to other objects and each other according to gravitational influences and our velocity. So, we have some control limited only by the means available to us. The speed of our movement also effects our size and our mass. The faster something moves through a space, it's physical dimensions are reduced but its mass is increased.

jimbo;1101167 wrote: the fourth



what do you think of this then oh wise buddy





The Fourth Dimension



Time Travel



10/1 - robertmotza - If you place a light source in the confines of any dimension 'N' and then an Occupant of that dimension approaches the source, the occupants shadow will have dimension of N-1. Could we be 'shadows' of four dimensional beings? Yes, it is true that a 3-d being could be a slice or shadow of a 4-d being. As far as the shadow thoery alone though, my first reaction is that it seems nonsensical. Our shadows do not have a consciousness of their own, nor would we have one if we were only 4-d shadows. If you are speaking more metaphorically, then it might be closer to the slice idea. But, why would we be 4-d beings yet are only aware of our 3-d existance? And why don't we have mobility in the 4th dimension at all? If we did have mobility in the fourth, then we wouldn't have stability in the third.

Although I have proposed theories of my own about dimensions beyond our own, I personally feel it is illogical. I haven't personally looking much into string theory, so I cannot totally say, but hear out my argument. They say that it is closely related to time travel, because the currently accepted idea is that time is the fourth dimension. I have heard that time is relative, and that is how it is possible. But, I believe it is only relative to position, and not events. What I mean is that you could get to a point before light does, but you can't go back to when your great grandfather was still alive. Dimensions are not real world phenomenoms. They are mathematical descriptions. In that sense, it doesn't seem valid that we would have more of what we don't even have in the first place. It may make sense mathematically and may even apply in some aspects, but I don't believe it goes beyond that. Even if time is the fourth dimension, it is not one that we can navigate freely, so it doesn't qualify as a dimension as we know the meaning of the word.




I agree with this.

jimbo;1101167 wrote: the fourth



what do you think of this then oh wise buddy





Theory: The fourth dimension is spirituality.



6/5 - Basically God and spirits are capable of roaming about the fourth dimension and can pass through our universe. Try not to picture the the fourth dimension, try only to understand it.



1. It consists of our 3-d "plane" (which is the universe) dividing it into heaven and hell, the two equal infinite halfs of the 4th dimension.



2. Spirits are four dimensional creatures and therefore are see-through and can pass through walls. The soul is capable of coexisting simultaneously with the body because the the soul is actually in a 3-d space parrallel to the one we know of. They are see-through because we only see a 3-d "slice" of what they really are. Let's say for instance there are 2-d people running around on the plane in picture 1.



There is a square with money on the interior of it. As far as the 2-d folk know, no one can get the money without breaking the walls. But, we 3-d people know that if you come in the from the third dimension (picture 2), you can grab the money and amaze the 2-d people.



Try to make an analogy between that and our world. 4-d people can get into a closed box or room without breaking the walls. They appear to go through them.


A four dimensional object would, by its own definition, have three-dimensional qualities as well as the fourth. The three-dimensional qualities would appear to us.

What has been overlooked in any debate of this subject is what quality a one-dimensional being might have. A one-dimensional being may have the qualities of any one of the known dimensions and we would only see it if that quality was one of the three dimensions we can see. If it consisted of only a time dimension, it would not have a physical body that we could see. Whether it is possible for a one-dimensional object to exist is another matter. Even a pencil line has a length, width and height if only because of the molecules it is made of.

Gods and spirits are concepts. They have no physical manifestation. Ergo, they do not have 4-dimensional bodies. It seems to me that the writer is assuming that the fourth dimension is a physical one that we are unable to see.

jimbo;1101167 wrote: the fourth



what do you think of this then oh wise buddy





The Fourth Dimension



Theory: The fourth dimension is time.





6/10 - I believe this is a nice idea but I do not believe that we have the capablity of time travel. The present serves as a nice 3-d "plane" that divides the 4-d space into two equal halfs, past and future, both of which are infinite. But, the restriction on our motion in this dimension seems to mean that time is not a physical fourth dimension. In other words, I do not believe that we can travel through time. It can be used as a model or idea though since a lot of the properties of dimensions apply.


The past and the future only exist as concepts. We cannot reach out and touch them. It is possible to think that every moment that has occurred has been frozen onto a hologram. However, nature does not define moments, we do.

jimbo;1101185 wrote: i looked this up after i asked you though your answer as always was very interesting ,i find stuff like this compulsive veiwing on the nat/geo channels



here is quite the most fascanating peace on time travel ,i have ever read



but as always the more you learn the more questions arise :-5



we do in fact travel in time all of us every day ,if we look at the moon we travel half a second or so ,to how the moon was when the reflected sunlight left it

throughthe Hubble telescope we can travel back 13 and a half billion years ago to the furthest regions of known space its taken that long for the light from those stars to reach us



could time travel ever be possible for humans to physically travel through time



seeing as there is no one from the future here yet i doubt it your thoughts please


What do we know about time at the moment? Time slows down as an object speeds up. The light from an object can reach two points in space of unequal distance to the light source at the same time suggesting that light travel is instantaneous. Yet, it takes a year for light to travel one lightyear. These last two items are contradictory. Mass and gravity slow down time.

By the very nature of time, we cannot travel backwards in time. We can only effect a limited control over the rate at which we move forward through it. We can, theoretically, perform a trick that would take us to a point in space before we left it. It is nothing more than a trick and it shows that time is a relative dimension. The only dimensions that are not relative are singularities and scalar dimensions. Vectors consist of at least two dimensions one of which is usually time. So, you could argue that time is the third dimension.

Personally, I find the concept of three-dimensional space an anomoly. We use three scalar dimensions to make physical objects or we use geometry to make cylindrical/spherical objects. The latter only require two or one scalar dimension respectively.

jimbo;1101197 wrote: so you are saying time gone and time future do not exist



all we have is the now





hmmmm i will get back to you on this


That is precisely what I am saying. There is nothing to travel back or forwards to.

Time is not an extension of space. It is only a measurement relative to another measurement.

OpenMind;1101209 wrote: That is precisely what I am saying. There is nothing to travel back or forwards to.

Time is not an extension of space. It is only a measurement relative to another measurement.


Pretty deep stuff OpenFly....:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

What are the colors of a rainbow?

jimbo;1101233 wrote: shellybelly you should be put in prism for a question like that :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl



o/m read this i think we are getting somewhere it even has a sectionon black holes/spheres :sneaky::sneaky::sneaky:



Does Time Exist? « Quantum Weirdness


I can't be put in a prism until I get outta the psych ward. Have you read my avavtar? That's you I'm talking about Jimbutt. :p:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I can't read anything deep right now, it'll put me back to sleep and my football play-off game starts in 53 minutes!! Go Miami Dolphins!!!:-4

shelbell;1101228 wrote: Pretty deep stuff OpenFly....:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl



What are the colors of a rainbow?


The colours of the rainbow are diffracted sunlight.

Why i have i just realised your a guy???

I thought you were a woman all this time :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

jimbo;1101233 wrote: shellybelly you should be put in prism for a question like that :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl





o/m read this i think we are getting somewhere it even has a sectionon black holes/spheres :sneaky::sneaky::sneaky:





Does Time Exist? « Quantum Weirdness


That could be a useful forum.:-6

jimbo;1101358 wrote: well he did have his fly open although it was cold weather there was very little evidence for you to go with :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


Flie's open here is called 'Your shop's open for business'. :yh_rotfl

At least there is some evidence Jumbo who unlike you, one would need to carry a microscope at all times :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

oscar;1101356 wrote: Why i have i just realised your a guy???



I thought you were a woman all this time :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


Oscar. You are beyond help.

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Nomad;1101115 wrote: What is up with otters ? Its always about the otters with everyone. Otters this and otters that.....God !

Everytime I turn around someone is posting otter pictures and making up otter poems or telling some kind of crazy otter story.

Dont get me wrong, Im not anti otter. I dont think otters are the work of the devil and I dont belong to any of those down with otters or otters what are they good for groups your always hearing about.

Those guys are some real fanatics.

The thing is I cant spend my whole life worrying about them or checking up on them. Ive got my own problems. I think the otters will be just fine if I dont visit them or sing otter songs praising them....whatever.

Im sorry but I just had to get that out.


Thanks, Nomad. I feel a lot better now.:-6:-6

:D

OpenMind;1101369 wrote: Thanks, Nomad. I feel a lot better now.:-6:-6

:D


I had a curry last week that was medium and this week i had another curry called a 'Tarka' curry. It was a 'little otter' :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

jimbo;1101233 wrote: shellybelly you should be put in prism for a question like that :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl





o/m read this i think we are getting somewhere it even has a sectionon black holes/spheres :sneaky::sneaky::sneaky:





Does Time Exist? « Quantum Weirdness


So, a moment can now be defined as the time it takes a photon moving at c to traverse Planck's length.

If we were to travel faster than the speed of light, we would see nothing behind us until we slowed down below the speed of light. What is in front of us would probably blur as all photons would reach us instantaneously.

jimbo;1101358 wrote: well he did have his fly open although it was cold weather there was very little evidence for you to go with :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


Oy. I'm answering the questions here.:yh_rotfl

oscar;1101376 wrote: I had a curry last week that was medium and this week i had another curry called a 'Tarka' curry. It was a 'little otter' :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


[Closes eyes and slaps forehead.]