Thoughts

[eskimo]

I'm back to waste more time. I swear everything is a waste of time.

Was choosing to ride a bike for so long a good choice? I know we've had threads about what peoples lives would be like without riding in the past, but it does make me wonder. Everything would be simpler and i'd have spare time.

[JT!]

Say you go into a casino and play roulette. You put £100 on red. If you lose then you put £200 on red. If you lose again put £400 on red. Then £800 etc etc. (Doubling each time)

Eventually you must win, and each time you do you get the money back that you've put down so far + £100. So you always gain £100 on top.

My question is: There must be something that stops this tactic from working, otherwise it'd be too easy, so what is it?

Edit: I think I know the answer now

Most roulettes have a max and a min. Doubling stacks up pretty quickly, so you'll soon hit the max and then you're a bit f**ked. Also, like has been said, even if you start betting $1 and black or green shows up 10 times in a row (unlikely, about 1 in 1000) you're 11th bet would need to be $2,000. In theory, tonight I could go into a casino and make money tonight using the system. The problem is, every now and again you're going to hit your personal max and lose thousands when you were originally betting $1 to try and win $2.

For you're example, simply multiply everything by 10 (apart from the odds).

[Max Quinn]

I'm back to waste more time. I swear everything is a waste of time.

Ok so in rough relation to this.... I have a book, kind of like a diary but relevant to my thoughts rather than directly to my life, that I use to just get thoughts/stories/character ideas/lyrics/poems/pretentious waffle etc out of my head when I cant sleep. I wrote this in it last night, it's more a stream of conscious than any sort of theory, but food for thought all the same. Take from it what you will.

"It strikes me that there are two ways to look upon time.

It is in one way an eternal force of existence, a passage of the universe we are just a small spec within. Perhaps this definition of time has always existed, and always will, or perhaps there is something more (or simply nothing) either side of it. Perhaps existence without time, in inertia, is somehow possible, or maybe matter has to exist THROUGH time in order to be in existence. Time may just be a small element within a greater dimension, a long, drawn out, chemical reaction that on the face of whatever encapsulates it is over in an instant (although, outside of time it seems logical that an instant cannot exist). Within this definition, the only thing truly timeless is time itself.

On the other hand, there is time as the invention of mankind; the seconds, hours, weeks, years and millenniums that we employ to assert some sort of structure, relevance and power on our otherwise meaningless existence. This is the child of the former definition, bastardized with the philosophies and definitions of the planets most developed species, but is a child that will be out lived by the more timeless side of it's ancestry. This element of time is an invention of humans, and cannot exist, at least with relevance, without them. Within this definition, we add 'The Clock' (or more technically, timekeeping devices, most likely those most resilient to the passage of technology and the forces of nature such as Stone henge) to the list of timeless items. Time in this sense fails to exist without a device to measure it by, and a device to measure time is irrelevant without a observer to read it, so you could say that the homosapien is also timeless within it's own invention. If we fail to live for all eternity, until the parent definition of time ceases to exist, then by this logic not even our own definition of time is timeless.

Once time fails to be, has time itself been a waste of time?"

Edited April 8, 2012 by Max Quinn

[casualjoe]

My thoughts on time at the moment,

Time is just things changing relative to other things, space and time share a beautiful relationship that is well known.

I'll even take a stab at predicting that time slows down when you approach a black hole and reaches a net change of 0 in the space which the singularity exists. So if it were possible to stand in a black hole and look out into space, we'd see stars forming and dying in seconds because time outside proceeds so much faster.

We'll get to observe this in one year because currently there is a massive cloud of gas and dust accelerating towards the black hole at the centre of the milky way, currently at about 8 million miles per hour. I'd expect this cloud to start slowing down (relative to us) as it gets closer to the hole, then actually stop and linger around the event horizon for a while, then particles will either fall in (to be frozen in time) or radiate away due to the non regular, turbulent nature of a spinning gravity field that is constantly receiving energy from random directions.

So yea, there's something to look forward to

Edited April 8, 2012 by casualjoe

[Rich J]

I always think what if I had changed one decision, where would I be now. Things like what if I hadn't moved to Bristol or what if I hadn't gone out the night I met the girlfriend. I just wonder where I would be and what I'd be doing now.

[the mysterious leemur]

What's the similarity between myself and a neutrino ?

We both penetrated your mother yesterday .