100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: It's time for the questions | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
It's time to ask me funny questions.
I'm a bit drunk, so shoot away. I'm a genius so I should be able to answer all your questions. 
Shoot! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm tired..from paiting for my sons arrival..
So the only question I have....looking at your pic.. Do you always wear white shirts and Black sun glasses....lmao |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know you're a hottie, that I can see.. Genius what do I have to on for that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He is a hottie
My question? Hmm..I will get back to ya 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
jedigirl
on
Sat 05/02/09 11:21 PM
|
|
ok genius..
assuming the universe is infinitely large and would therefore contain an infinite amount of roughly uniformly distributed stars, then should not the night sky be blazing with light from these stars? and if so what is your theory on why? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm tired..from paiting for my sons arrival.. So the only question I have....looking at your pic.. Do you always wear white shirts and Black sun glasses....lmao I only wear white t-shirts on black fridays and when I wanna look cool, and I only wear sunglasses for pictures. Other times I just squint my eyes. Some people think I'm Chinesej when I squint my eyes, others trying to figure out if I still can see when I do that. But then I explain them I only like rice from India and squinting my eyes does not limit angle of my view, only from above. . 
Next question! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm tired..from paiting for my sons arrival.. So the only question I have....looking at your pic.. Do you always wear white shirts and Black sun glasses....lmao I only wear white t-shirts on black fridays and when I wanna look cool, and I only wear sunglasses for pictures. Other times I just squint my eyes. Some people think I'm Chinesej when I squint my eyes, others trying to figure out if I still can see when I do that. But then I explain them I only like rice from India and squinting my eyes does not limit angle of my view, only from above. .
Next question! Yep our resident hottie is drunk...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok genius.. assuming the universe is infinitely large and would therefore contain an infinite amount of roughly uniformly distributed stars, then should not the night sky be blazing with light from these stars? and if so why is your theory on why? The universe does not go by rules we believe in, and the stars are not distributed uniformly, and having the distance between the stars could be millions of light years. Just because we live on this miserable little useless planet, does not grant us to see everything, unless we invent something better than the Hubble telescope and even then, we will not see everything, since the galaxy is infinite. Not to mention, light bends to gravity and gravity is able to pull the light away and the dark matter (what is between heavenly bodies) is more than solid material. There are new born stars we have yet to see, since its light haven't arrived yet to be seen on Earth. Actually what we see on the sky is the past, since a star more than 25,000 light years away means, what we see is actually where it was and how it shined 25,000 years ago. Same deal with stars with a million light years away, those are what we see is how they looked a million years ago. What the actual sky look like today is actually a whole lot different than what we see. Crazy, isn't it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Atlantis75
on
Sat 05/02/09 11:31 PM
|
|
how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood? None. Chuck Norris would roundhouse kick him back to the water for using his name for funny crap. Next! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood? oh oh oh, I happen to have FINALLY found the answer to this one... 700 lbs....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Beachfarmer
on
Sat 05/02/09 11:34 PM
|
|
how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood? oh oh oh, I happen to have FINALLY found the answer to this one... 700 lbs....
 didn't hear anyone ask how much dope I smoked in college, man
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, they moved my thread..thanks to unimportant questions...thanks guys..damn it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok genius.. assuming the universe is infinitely large and would therefore contain an infinite amount of roughly uniformly distributed stars, then should not the night sky be blazing with light from these stars? and if so why is your theory on why? The universe does not go by rules we believe in, and the stars are not distributed uniformly, and having the distance between the stars could be millions of light years. Just because we live on this miserable little useless planet, does not grant us to see everything, unless we invent something better than the Hubble telescope and even then, we will not see everything, since the galaxy is infinite. Not to mention, light bends to gravity and gravity is able to pull the light away and the dark matter (what is between heavenly bodies) is more than solid material. There are new born stars we have yet to see, since its light haven't arrived yet to be seen on Earth. Actually what we see on the sky is the past, since a star more than 25,000 light years away means, what we see is actually where it was and how it shined 25,000 years ago. Same deal with stars with a million light years away, those are what we see is how they looked a million years ago. What the actual sky look like today is actually a whole lot different than what we see. Crazy, isn't it? ever heard of Olber's paradox....it proposes an active question in astrophysics... even if the farther stars are fainter, their number increases with distance, thus there should be an enormous amount of the star light reaching earth. ..the reality is that the night sky is relative dark...so either.. a.the universe really is not infinite and there is not an infinite number of stars....the size of the universe is small enough that the number of stars is not enough to light the night sky..or.....b.the farther a star is away, the faster it is receding which is your theory(Hubble's principle)right???so it really isnt "your theory"...there is also the theory that light from the farthest stars is red shifted....(a doppler shift for light)...below the visible region...therefore there is not enough visible light to light the night sky....or possibly the theory that space and the universe is filled with many clouds..."space dust"....thes clouds absorb visible light...thus light isnt available to light the night sky...all theorys and i have no contention with any....but it does atest to a mans proclamation of genius...imo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, they moved my thread..thanks to unimportant questions...thanks guys..damn it. You know we  you
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok genius.. assuming the universe is infinitely large and would therefore contain an infinite amount of roughly uniformly distributed stars, then should not the night sky be blazing with light from these stars? and if so why is your theory on why? The universe does not go by rules we believe in, and the stars are not distributed uniformly, and having the distance between the stars could be millions of light years. Just because we live on this miserable little useless planet, does not grant us to see everything, unless we invent something better than the Hubble telescope and even then, we will not see everything, since the galaxy is infinite. Not to mention, light bends to gravity and gravity is able to pull the light away and the dark matter (what is between heavenly bodies) is more than solid material. There are new born stars we have yet to see, since its light haven't arrived yet to be seen on Earth. Actually what we see on the sky is the past, since a star more than 25,000 light years away means, what we see is actually where it was and how it shined 25,000 years ago. Same deal with stars with a million light years away, those are what we see is how they looked a million years ago. What the actual sky look like today is actually a whole lot different than what we see. Crazy, isn't it? ever heard of Olber's paradox....it proposes an active question in astrophysics... even if the farther stars are fainter, their number increases with distance, thus there should be an enormous amount of the star light reaching earth. ..the reality is that the night sky is relative dark...so either.. a.the universe really is not infinite and there is not an infinite number of stars....the size of the universe is small enough that the number of stars is not enough to light the night sky..or.....b.the farther a star is away, the faster it is receding which is your theory(Hubble's principle)right???so it really isnt "your theory"...there is also the theory that light from the farthest stars is red shifted....(a doppler shift for light)...below the visible region...therefore there is not enough visible light to light the night sky....or possibly the theory that space and the universe is filled with many clouds..."space dust"....thes clouds absorb visible light...thus light isnt available to light the night sky...all theorys and i have no contention with any....but it does atest to a mans proclamation of genius...imo I wrote your name down "jedigirl" to my little notebook. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, they moved my thread..thanks to unimportant questions...thanks guys..damn it. ohhhhhhhhh wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sheesh... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, they moved my thread..thanks to unimportant questions...thanks guys..damn it. ohhhhhhhhh wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sheesh... Your name is getting in there too. indianrprancs.. let's just say this, If i would write my own name to my notebookk, I would start go get worried 5 minutes later... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, they moved my thread..thanks to unimportant questions...thanks guys..damn it. ohhhhhhhhh wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sheesh... Your name is getting in there too. indianrprancs.. let's just say this, If i would write my own name to my notebookk, I would start go get worried 5 minutes later... Honey, I've been drinking too.. draw me a picture.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, they moved my thread..thanks to unimportant questions...thanks guys..damn it. ohhhhhhhhh wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh sheesh... Your name is getting in there too. indianrprancs.. let's just say this, If i would write my own name to my notebookk, I would start go get worried 5 minutes later... Honey, I've been drinking too.. draw me a picture....
im just gonna keep humming...
|
|
|
|
|
