Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!

Once more into the . dear brothers...

JackNJackN <font color=#99FF99>Lightwave Alien</font>
in Zocalo v2.0
Getting back to Neutron Dots....

I wonder just what kind of mass it would take to make a Neutron Star as small as a standard period character on our forums?


Watch out for the DOT!!!

:eek:

Comments

  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    If anyone destroys the forum with a neutron dot, I'll hold them personally responsible for the simulataneous collapse of a few hundred people.
  • ArikArik Galen's Apprentice
    Ahhh Physics... a fascinating subject. Unfortunately, I've not had much luck with teachers so I don't know much about it beyond introductory undergrad-level stuff.

    As a result, I will not be able to answer your question, but will watch this thread in order to broaden my knowledge.

    E = mc^2

    Oh, and ... Pie are round.
  • CurZCurZ Resident Hippy
    You might want to try a narrowband polaron beam calibrated to the R-level flux matrix. Unfortunately, we'll have to crawl into the Jeffries' Tubes to fight the Borg in order to do that.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Don't forget to reverse the polarity on the toaster first.
  • ArikArik Galen's Apprentice
    Who needs school when there's FirstOnes!

    *taking notes*
    Polaron Beam
    Flux Matrix
    Jeffries' Tubes
    Toaster Polarities

    Keep the ideas coming people, pretty soon I'll have a Quantum Physics PhD-equivalent in notes.
  • LogicSequenceLogicSequence Elite Ranger
    well remember to modulate your sheild frequencies into the upper EM bands to avoid borg tracter beams from locking on!

    you might also want to consider using an inverse tachyon beam to shut down your opponents warp core!

    AND ALWAYS, ALWAYS remeber to depolarize your hyperspanner before putting it back in the tool box!
  • croxiscroxis I am the walrus
    And when it doesn't work, run a polarized kinetic pulvorizor test on it!
  • the_exilethe_exile Kupo!
    ...fluctuate... warp matrix... calibrations... hydropolarity... -otron...

    :confused: :confused:
  • TyvarTyvar Next best thing to a St. Bernard
    and always, always run a Physical Impulse Mechanical Stress Routine.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    But be sure to run it with the right modulation.
  • David of MacDavid of Mac Elite Ranger Ca
    I remember having one of those little sample cards they send out in the mail, to advertise for big binders full of cards with information on something or other on them. Well, this particular card was on black holes. It had a chart on the back, showing you how big the event horizon would be if objects of various masses were black holes.

    As I recall, the smallest one was a black hole with a mass of the earth, which would have an event horizon with a radius of two inches.

    So, to answer your question, I don't have a clue.
  • the_exilethe_exile Kupo!
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by David of Mac [/i]
    [B]As I recall, the smallest one was a black hole with a mass of the earth, which would have an event horizon with a radius of two inches.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Assuming a period is one millimeter wide (and exists in 3D space :p), and the Earth is 8000 miles wide...

    2 inches = 50.8 mm

    8000 miles = 12874752000 mm

    12874752000 / 50.8 = 253440000
    X / 1 = 253440000

    253440000 mm = 157.48 miles

    So if Earth was actually 8000 miles wide, and a period was both 3D and 1 mm wide, then the mass required to form a period-sized neutron star would be 157.48 miles wide :p
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    I'm fairly sure that a neutron star and a black hole arn't the same thing.

    Also, I think you'd have to work by volume, not radius or diameter.
  • CurZCurZ Resident Hippy
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by the_exile [/i]
    [B]Assuming a period is one millimeter wide (and exists in 3D space :p)[/B][/QUOTE]
    Technically, a period does exist in 3D space. It's a certain amount of glowing phosphor on a CRT. :p
  • A2597A2597 Fanboy
    [SIZE=-4].[/SIZE]

    thats pretty darn small for 1mm....
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Depends on your resolution. :)
  • bobobobo (A monkey)
    [SIZE=256].[/SIZE]
    Close :D
  • Lord RefaLord Refa Creepy, but in a good way
    Particle Man, Particle Man
    Doing the things a particle can
    What's he like it's not important
    Particle Man
    Is it a dot or is it a speck
    when he's underwater does he get wet
    or does the water get him instead
    Nobody knows
    Particle Man

    [URL=http://koti.mbnet.fi/senator/particleman.mp3]Particle Man[/URL]
  • the_exilethe_exile Kupo!
    lol, I'm on 800 x 600 on this HP, but I mainly did that because I was bored. I mean, we were assuming that a tiny, 2D dot has the same average density as the Earth, and, as Biggie said, that a neutron star's size is determined in the same way as a bloack hole's. :p
  • MessiahMessiah Failed Experiment
    A surface is 2D, a line is 1D, I dont think a dot in it self is even a dimension.
  • ArikArik Galen's Apprentice
    Isn't a line two-dimensional, whereas a dot is one-dimensional (therefore being mostly theoretical... what is a 1-dimensional object?)
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    No. A plane is 2D. A theoretical line has a single dimension. You can go in either direction in this dimension, but there's nowhere else to go.

    If you're talking about a line drawn on paper or something like that, then technically that's a plane (assuming the paper is perfectly flat and smooth) since it has width as well as length.
  • MessiahMessiah Failed Experiment
    Thats the funny thing about singularities. They only exist in one precise spot at any given moment (disregarding quantum mechanics). Unlike you and I who are in fact very, very big objects on the scale of things.
  • the_exilethe_exile Kupo!
    A period is a 2D object, because, like Biggles said, it is not a [i]theoretical[/i] dot. Anything that exists in reality is in fact 3-dimensional unless viewed theoretically, because if you draw a line with a pencil, you have to account for the fact that the lead that rubbed onto the paper has width and depth, not just length. Everything on my PC screen is theoretically 2D, and it certainly looks like it to me (despite Window's attempts at shading the edges of the text boxes :p), but it has to be made of something... like neotron dots :eek:
  • ArikArik Galen's Apprentice
    yep, I was talking about a line drawn on paper.
  • JackNJackN <font color=#99FF99>Lightwave Alien</font>
    I had this funny visual in my mind for an animated smilie...

    a neutron dot and a green smilie face. The smilie looks at the dot, and moves closer, until the tidal forces rip the smilie apart and shear him along the outside edge of the tidal zone around the neutron dot...

    :D
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Arik [/i]
    [B]yep, I was talking about a line drawn on paper. [/B][/QUOTE]

    In which case your statement is only half correct, because a dot on paper has the same number of dimensions as a line. :)
  • ArikArik Galen's Apprentice
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]In which case your statement is only half correct, because a dot on paper has the same number of dimensions as a line. :) [/B][/QUOTE]

    Hmm... this gets confusing because there are so many different perspectives. I was definitely wrong in my previous post, but let me explain...

    When I was talking about a line being 2D and a dot being 1D, I was thinking of the height as being a measurable size for both, while the width of a dot is infinitely small. This is wrong, rendering my earlier statement invalid. However, there is a number of ways to look at this...

    So here are a few possibilities:

    1) A line has a finite, measurable width and height, while a dot's width and height would be the smallest measurable unit on the 2D plane, approaching 0 (or 1/infinity, making it infinitely small?).
    Resulting Dimensions for a line: 2
    Resulting Dimensions for a dot: 0
    Problem: The line in this example is actually more of a rectange.

    2) Both the line and the dot have a finite, measurable width and height, making them real 2D plane objects.
    Resulting Dimensions for a line: 2
    Resulting Dimensions for a dot: 2

    3) My flawed initial approach, with the height being measurable in both a line and a dot, while the width is only real for the line.
    Resulting Dimensions for a line: 2
    Resulting Dimensions for a dot: 1
    Problem: What makes the height special enough to become measurable in a dot while the width isn't? ;)

    4) Both the line and the dot are real, 3D objects (written, drawn or printed on a real surface), meaning that they'd have a depth from the pen/pencil mark as well as from the absorbed ink/paint/any other medium.
    Resulting Dimensions for a line: 3
    Resulting Dimensions for a dot: 3

    5) A line has a measurable width, but not height, and the dot has no width or height.
    Resulting Dimensions for a line: 1
    Resulting Dimensions for a dot: 0

    This is the scenario that Messiah referred to in his post. Now that I've given it more thought, I actually agree with Messiah, and prefer approach #5 for looking at this problem.

    Note: The line in the above examples is a horizontal one, and I assume that width is measured horizontally. Changing how the line is drawn or how width is measured will invalidate any of the above arguments. :)
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Approach #5 is correct for theoretical lines and dots. The rest is too confusing. :)
  • MessiahMessiah Failed Experiment
    For non theoretical lines and dots, the answer will always be 3D. After all, we use 3dimensional objects to create those 3dimensional objects. And you cannot [i]create[/i] anything with less dimensions than you have.
Sign In or Register to comment.