Question about folds in time.?
598318
The basic idea behind “folding” space or time comes from Einstein’s General theory of Relativity, so if you’ll bear with me for a moment…  What he proposed was a totally new, geometrical description of space and time that led to a different description of gravity—one that linked space to time and mass to energy in a fundamentally geometrical fashion. In other words, mass(-energy) shapes space(-time) instead of acting like a “force” in the traditional Newtownian sense. This alteration in the fundamental geometry of space-time is often described as the “curvature” or “bending” of space. \n\n(Thus, in Newton’s description of gravity, one would say that all bodies exert an attractive gravitational force on one another; “space” is just the place where it happens. In Einstein’s conception, one would say that all bodies change the underlying geometry of space—and time, too—in a way that causes them to be attracted to one another.)\n\nSo we often talk of space-time being “warped” or “curved” (honestly, “folded” sounds a little extreme) by the presence of mass(-energy). The only we see space-time deformed in the Universe around us is by the presence of a lot of matter—light being bent around the Sun, clocks being affected by Earth’s gravity, that sort of thing.  To do something similar (like the “Smallville” example) would require very large quantities of mass or energy.\n\nThe caveat is that curvature or bending really only provides an analogy to what the equations tell us. If you want to imagine the effects of an object on its surrouning space(-time), then you can think of it as changing the shape of space(-time) in its vicinity. The distortion is real—we can measure its effects—but the images that are often presented (of flexible sheets of space-time with bowling balls or marbles rolling around on them) simply present analogous situations.\n\nThe issue with “folding” is that it suggests something like a crease in space-time, and that’s problematic in the sense that gentle “curves” or “warps” are mathematically simple to describe, but adding anything like a hard edge becomes tricky.  Plus, to make the transition from one part of space-time to another requires bringing those two points in contact—a challenge that makes “folding” look simple!\n\nJ. Richard Gott wrote a book, “Time Travel in Einstein’s Universe: The Physical Possibilities of Travel Through Time” that addresses the “reality” of time travel from the perspective of contemporary physics:\nhttp://www.powells.com/partner/30700/biblio/0395955637\n\n\nRyan Wyatt\nRose Center for Earth & Space\nNew York, New York
422731
I have seen Ben Folds twice now and I know he wasn't lip syncing either one of those times. He would mess up and just stop playing and start over the first time cause he was so drunk. Ha! Oh I love Ben. \n\nI would guess what happened was Ben was probably sick, he knew this, they might have used the back up music that night cause he wasn't feeling up to singing but he hates to let people down. I haven't heard anything about this incident though. That's sad!
1119002
Time folds in as much as it is within life.\nThe future exists with the past
492854
ok, lets make this simple.\n\nIf a shape can be folded over itself and cover itself exactly, the article is said to be symmetrical and the "fold line" is said to be an axis of symmetry.\n\nA square is a symmetrical shape with 4 axis of symmetry, the two diagnals and one line drawn across it half way up, one line drawn down through it, half way across it.\n\nA circle has an infinate nubber of axis of symmetry, each one being a diameter.\n\nOne way to look at this axis is to think of it as a mirror placed on a plain geometrical shape, the reflection is the other half of the shape.
1081620
First of all, lets just look at 12 hrs, as it will be the same for the next twelve:\n\nThe minute hand revolves around the clock at 1 rev per 60 minutes, the hour hand revolves around at 1 rev per 60•12 minutes.  Knowing that after 60 minutes the minute hand is back to where it started we can say that 2π≡0.  We want to rewrite the above relations to give us the positions as a value of time.  This can be done by assuming that t is time (in minutes) and using m=2π/60t (minute hand) and h=2π/(12•60)t (hour hand).  \nTherefore we want to solve m=h+2πk for some integer 0≤k≤10.  The reason that we don't have k go to 11 is because if you think about it, the hour and minute hand never cross during the 11th hour, they keep getting closer, but then at 12:00 (during the 12th hour) they meet.\n\nThus 2π/60t=2π/(12•60)t+2πk ==>> 12t=t+720k ==>>11t=720k ==>> t=720/11k.\n\nNow, this is the time after 12:00 (midnight or noon, I don't care they; are the same). \nThese times are:\n\n12:00 (k=0)\n1:60/11=1:05:300/11≈1:05:27.27 (k=1)\n2:10:600/11≈2:10:54.55\n3:16:240/11≈3:16:21.81\n4:21:540/11≈4:21:49.09\n5:27:180/11≈5:27:16.36\n6:32:480/11≈6:32:43.64\n7:38:120/11≈7:38:10.91\n8:43:420/11≈8:43:38.18\n9:49:60/11≈9:49:05.45\n10:54:360/11≈10:54:32.73\n\nI decided to give you the second values as fractions also, since they can't be given accurately by a terminating decimal.
184793
The flipping of the bird should be taken on a case by case basis.  If you are incapable of deterimining an appropriate time for this response, perhaps you should just do it constantly.  That way no one can say you're inconsistent.
465970
It's impossible to describe time because the past can be the present for someone, or the future for another person. The present can be the past for someone and the future for someone. Also, if time is always passing, then there is no stable moment in times passing because it goes down to the most infinently small amount of time in between things happening. As it goes down in infinity, time doesn't really exist, but it has to, otherwise everything would stop.\n\nI suppose that was confusing. Well, it's what I think.
121281
I once heard that any paper was restricted to only 7 folds.\n\nGuess I'll be checking it out. There goes productivity for the day...
680669
we r travelling at 1 second forward per second.\n\nIf that's not that u meant, the easiest and most likely way to get a time machine to time travel is for yourself in the future to travel back now to give yourself the time machine now which u got in the "past" from the "future yourself" coming back to gave it to u.
324543
This is where convention comes in. hehe.\n\nYou see, today "time" is defined based on a reference. We define one second as exactly 9,192,631,770 oscillations or cycles of the cesium atom's resonant frequency, replacing the old second that was defined in terms of the Earth's motions.\n\nThe "uncertainity" is due to the fact that our one second here ( where its based on the measurement of this number of oscilations )  is NOT 100% the same as compared to our measurement of one second based on the previous way.\n\nWhat was the previous way? Well, it bascially defines one second the other way around. What i mean here is that in the old days time is defined relative to the motion of the earth around the sun. Ancients defined the total time taken for the earth to finish one complete revolution around the sun as one year. Then they agreed that one year is approximately made up of 365 days. Each day is then divided into 24 hours. 1 hour is then considered as having 60 minutes where 1 minute comprises as 60 seconds.\n\nOf course to achieve the definition of time as how we have it now did not just come overnight. It took some time... hehe. I did not attempt a chronological development of the idea but just intend to shed some light on the subject. You can find further information on the link below.
702956
Okay I think the other 2 answers you already had when I started this misunderstood your question so I'll get it right for you.\n\nTwo things happen in the 16 seconds.\n1. rock falls s meters\n2. sound travels back up s meters from water surface to well opening\n\nFirst let's deal with the #1 part, the rock's fall.  For this let's use a variable called t1 for time.\n\nWe need to use this formula: s = (v1)(t) + ½(a)(t)²\ns = displacement, v1 = initial velocity, t=time, a=acceleration\n\nSince the rock is dropped it has no initial velocity.  Let down be positive.\n\ns = (v1)(t1) + ½(a)(t1)²\ns = (0)(t1) + ½(a)(t1)²\ns = ½(a)(t1)²\n\nOkay so we figured out what we can in this step about t1.  Now let's go to step 2 and see what we can figure out about t2.\n\nThe sound travelled from the water up to the well opening (s meters) in some amount of time we don't know yet (t2).  We can describe the sound's movement with this formula:\n\ns = (v)(t) (we use this because the sound is not accelerating)\n\ns = displacement, v = velocity, t = time\n\nNow let's use our variables (t2, our s) and use v2 for the sound's velocity and see what we can put together with the sound.\n\ns = (v2)(t2)\n\nOkay so we know something about the sound and rock now, let's gather what we found and look at it.\n\n1. s = ½(a)(t1)²\n2. s = (v2)(t2)\n\nThere is something else we know too and can write down as an equation.  We know that the time it took for the rock to hit the water and the time it took for the sound of the splash to travel back up to the opening add up to a total of 16 seconds.  So we can write it as:\n\nt1 + t2 = 16s (let's isolate the t2 and call it equation 3)\n3. t2 = 16 - t1\n\nSo all together we have:\n\n1. s = ½(a)(t1)²\n2. s = (v2)(t2)\n3. t2 = 16 - t1\n\nWe have enough equations now to solve for the number of variables we have.  Start by substituting t2 from #3 into #2 to get equation #4.\n\n4. s = (v2)(16 - t1)\n\nNow set 1. and 4. equal to each other (because they are both s so they are equal so we can do that)\n\n(v2)(16 - t1) = ½(a)(t1)²       (expand it out now)\n\n16(v2)-(t1)(v2) = ½(a)(t1²)\n\nNow put in what we know (v2 = 345m/s, a = 9.8m/s)\n\n16(345)-(t1)(345) = 4.9(t1²)   (move it all to one side and it should look familiar)\n\n4.9t1²+345t1-5520=0  (it's a quadratic equation and we can solve those, stick it in your calculator)\n\nt1 solves to\nt1 = 13.436\nor\nt1 = -83.844 (forget this one, the rock didn't hit before you dropped it)\n\nSo t1 = 13.436m (we only know this to 2 significant digits)\n\nNow we can finally solve for s by using equation #1\n1. s = ½(a)(t1)²\ns = ½(9.8)(13.436)²\ns = 884.57m (only to two sig. digits)\n\ns = 880 meters
500239
Why certainly, darling, I'm a master of twisted laydowns, er, layouts.\n\nAll kidding aside, I admire what you do as it is a fantastic sport and only those such as yourself can avail themselves of the skills necessary to perform beautifully.\n\nWish I could help you further....
393412
A Thousand years, or one trillion trillionth of a second time is of no consequence, I myself have concluded that time is a independent state of function, so with respect to your question I would say that possibly it does not take so many years for a mountain to form, and it is only with direct respect to our perceptions that it seems as such with respect to our measurement of the passage of time, although the function of mountain formation is with direct respect to plate tectonics's in which our planets surface which is also measured by our perceptions as extremely hard, and  dense actually moves on a river of swirling molten lava, and as two continents pull away from one another they are stretched and valleys, and crevasse's, are formed, although you cannot observe them because the oceans are covering there surface, although on the opposing end of the spectrum, and at the end in which two continents or surface plates come together, Continent plate "1" will force Continent plate "2" under Continent "1", then as Continent "2" travels under Continent "1", then at that point Mountains are formed as continent "1" Rises.\n\nTherefore with direct respect to your question, I hope that this helps you see possibly that the fact of time measurement with respect to mountain formation is of little consequence to the functional action which brings about there creation, as time measurement is merely associated by the perceptions of consciousness of the entity's measuring the observations with direct respect to there time plane.
982759
Pulling quickly. Inertia is the reluctance of an object to change its state of motion, i.e from stationary to moving. You can see it as a delay in time that an object takes. And that's what you have to make use of. In other words, before the entire tissue roll starts to unroll after it experiences a force (by your hand on the piece of tissue), the tissue MUST come down.\n\nHope this helps=)
652548
if the time of the whole universe reverse... everything would seemed the same since u r part of the universe. You mark one event to another to mark the relative order of events. If all things reverse, u have no way to tell.
835650
Youve obviously already gotten the answer by now, but I want to add that this can actually be done on purpose. My mother and only one other person I have met can do this. Mom just says she folds the gum in half and it pops, but I cant seem to do it. ;P
163967
It's not technically 7 or 8. It's just that for ordinary paper that you have hanging around the house -- looseleaf, newspaper, wrapping paper -- all of these are approximately the same order of magnitude for their width/size in respect to thickness. \n\nThe first fold doubles the thickness and halves the width/length. The second doubles again, and so on. Essentially, if the original width/length is W and thickness T, for each fold N, the new width is W*2^(-N) and new thickness is T*2^N. For a piece of looseleaf, whose original length is about 270 mm and thickness is 0.1 mm, the 7th fold causes the thickness to surpass length. For a post-it note, the fold that does it in is theoretically the 5th or 6th. The site below talks about a bright girl who decided to roll out 4000 feet of toilet paper in a mall. Toilet paper is about 0.05 mm thick so theoretically, the 13th fold should be tough. She got 12 out of it.