>> ^Jinx:

>> ^juliovega914:
If this measurement turns out to be true, we basically have to restart physics.

Again, not necessarily. It would be a ground breaking discovery and would certainly raise a lot of questions...but then I did perhaps one of the most brain melting experiments with results that appear to contradict theory and common sense when I was 14 years old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment


No, it would be a HUGE discovery! One of the biggest ever! and it would completely redefine our modern theory!

If a massive particle moves faster than the speed of light, that means the Lorentz factor for calculating the energy of the particle will be complex! (gamma = c/squrt(c^2-v^2), for v>c, gamma is complex). Do any of you have any fucking idea what that means?

(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/veltran.html for those of you who dont know wtf I am talking about)

What people need to do is not freak the fuck out and work on exactly why they are getting these readings. If this measurement turns out to be true, we basically have to restart physics.

I didnt read the arguments up till here because they bring TL;DR to a whole new level but...

If there was no distinction between equality and equivalence, and the infinitesimally small value was indeed equal to zero, calculus wouldn't be a thing. The immediate velocity if any object would be equal to displacement/time = displacement/0 (since time is zero for immediate velocity) = infinity. This of course meaning that every time you move your car (or anything that has MASS) it would take an infinite amount of energy to do so.

So its wrong.

>> ^jimnms:

Does smoking pot do the same thing or just tobacco? (I don't smoke either BTW, just curious)


Its a matter of quantity. On a per-cigarette basis, weed is worse because it is generally unfiltered, but you will be hard pressed to find someone that smokes as much weed as they do cigarettes. A typical smoker might consume a pack a day, a typical pothead might consume a joint every other day.

Oh fuck, you're completely right, I didn't notice that the right gear is set slightly forwards from the rest to promote that behavior. I had assumed it was being driven by some geartrain behind the board. Pretty badass, but I am sure that would be a pretty bad geartrain efficiency due to all the friction, and low lifespan as well.

This type of gear is commonly used so that you can have a gear ratio (mechanical advantage) that is a variable as a function of angle of rotation of the gear. Its difficult to tell just from this video if that is happening in this case (as oppose to simply having a z-constrained contact point, not unlike a helical gear). If the contact point moves from left to right in the x direction (perpendicular to the axles, in the direction from gear center to gear center) the leverage changes and so you can have a regularly variable gear ratio, which is useful for certain applications such as periodic motion generators.

One thing I am sure many of you didn't notice is that the gear on the far right is not touching the center drive gear at all, despite it only being slightly more distant from the drive gear. Indeed it is spinning in the opposite direction while still not interfering with the drive gear. It would take an extremely small axial motion for the drive gear to transfer its torque to the right gear and away from the left, and would likely result in extremely minimal galling and gear damage since the gear is pretty much kept in proper shape. In a standard spur gear, this would require the use of huge numbers of extremely tiny teeth, which anyone who knows their solid mechanics would tell you that they are very weak compared to something like this.

The following modification to this video would constitute the best videosift of all time:

When he finishes his statement (beginning at 1:45)

"The American Psychological Association is made up of people who agree with the American Psychological Association"

someone jumps out from the crowd and hits him in the teeth with an aluminum baseball bat.

I am amazed they didnt feature the vid of the car being hit by the rocket-sled. It blew the paint of the goddamn car.

Wow, god damn, that brake that that machine pulls is nothing short of spectacular. I occasionally do braking mechanisms for industrial machinery, and I am dumbfounded as to how he removed that much angular momentum that quickly. It almost looks like an impact brake, which is easily capible of braking like that but difficult to deal with because it involves using parts that destroy themselves, and have to be replaced

Remember Remember...

Jamie DeWolf found dead today...


Seriously tho, this was awsome

>> ^honkeytonk73:

Good speech.. but the 'god bless america' sign could have been left out of the video. We're talking about science and research here. Not clinging to bronze age myths to pacify human emotional insecurities.


Its not the rational-minded intelligent people that they are trying to appeal to in this video. Most of the smart ones are in favor of promoting NASA.

Seriously, why do people film this stuff? Is filming your driving becoming some kind of a new fad?

"Love thy neighbor"

Seriously some of the worst people on earth. Spreading untold misery. Seemingly formed only to prove that you can follow the exact word of the bible whilst simultaneously following the polar opposite of it's meaning.

It's never going to get better, is it?