Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
Joined: 9/26/2006
Msg: 3
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.Page 2 of 2    (1, 2)
If you were 6 billion light years tall you couldn't move your arm fast enough to cross your field of vision in 1 sec. your finger would be several hundred million miles across. With a subsequent amount of inertia.
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 5
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 12:21:32 PM

How fast is my finger moving?
Slower than the speed of light. Time will slow down for me, so that the movement of my finger takes many thousands of years, or the galaxies will appear so close, that they have only a few light-seconds between them.

What will someone viewing the event from Earth through a powerful telescope observe?
They will observe a huge object the size of a galaxy and the shape of a cigar, travelling through space from close to one galaxy to close to another.

What will my experience of the event be compared to the experience of the little chappie peering through his telescope?
It will be affected by time dilation and length dilation. You'll see things as being much closer together, and that everything appears to move much, much slower.

Interesting question. But consider that even at light-speed, it would take 12 billion years to touch your toes. You're not gonna get to do a lot of exercise.
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 6
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 12:23:00 PM
probly'jus does it in his pants.

That was my other question...Who's his tailor?

On a slightly more serious note, why should the definition of a second change with scale?
Based on the assumption that you really meant something of the order of time gets scaled up with the guy, I figure (based on a quick, error prone calculation) that his "second" would take about 500 quadrillion years, so by the time he's brushed by his nose, the universe will probably be nothing but protons (I'm assuming all other particles would decay in that time frame, but I could be wrong).

Actually, doing the calculation was kind of a relief; I figure our galaxy (and us) would be toast loooonng before he has to have a whizz. (but I AM kinda worried that his dog might be somewhere around, and that it might be male)
Joined: 7/13/2009
Msg: 7
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 1:27:44 PM
What do the 6's symbolize, or is it just an arbitrary number? Ah, who am I kidding, this thread ain't gonna' last long, lol.
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 9
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 2:50:35 PM

(I hope there's a thread heaven)

Maybe we can save it if we get the "paddles" on in time...
Joined: 1/17/2009
Msg: 11
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 3:38:37 PM
I wonder if he would engage in mental masturbation like this, or have an actual life?
Joined: 10/23/2008
Msg: 13
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 4:23:19 PM

--^v--^v--^v-----^v-------^v-------------- (beeeeeeeeeep)

(I hope there's a thread heaven

Don't worry. I have many threads, in thread heaven. They can keep your one, company...

...but would the 500 quadrillion years seem 'just that' to the 6 billion lightyear tall man or would the 1 second of finger movement he carries out seem like just 1 second to him?
Would the tiny chappie with the telescope on Earth have to live 500 quadrillion years in order to witness the full second???

So I want to repeat back how I am reading this, to make sure that I understand this correctly. Is this a size scale vs. time subjective relativity thought experiment?
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 14
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 light years tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 4:35:52 PM
I would say he would have to live with different physical laws.
or in a different dimension, spiritual, or what ever, which does go by other laws.

can you imagine what his gravity would be?

I was thinking years ago, why we are the size we are.

it seems to work good for this size earth.
 Leib ben Yitshak
Joined: 3/26/2008
Msg: 17
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/9/2009 8:04:26 PM
Don't these depend on which finger you are using?
Joined: 4/4/2008
Msg: 21
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/10/2009 1:40:32 AM
I think being 6 billion light years tall would be pretty neat because your gravity well would be so deep that you'd literally pull the local universe into, plastering yourself with stars and nebulae. As this happens, you'd try to move and breathe and realize that the contraction of muscles and lungs would take literally millions or billions of years (not to mention synaptic firing between neurons). And then the vertigo would kick in, and then the question of what to eat.
By the end of my first few billion years, I'd be so disgruntled that I'd begin to smoke entire galaxies and I'd get so muncy that I'd forget where I was and start asking questions about God and reality to a passing supercluster.
And where would I get good Thai?
Joined: 12/27/2005
Msg: 22
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/10/2009 2:15:01 AM
This has to be a thought experiment because there is an upper limit to how big earthly biological creatures can get. There comes a point when flesh and bone are too massive to support their own weight and a creature simply collapses, unable to live any longer.
The largest dinosaurs pretty much pushed the upper limit on how big flesh and bone creatures could get on land.
This is why whales, who have their body mass supported by water are unable to live on land for very long.

I'm not saying that a 6 billion light year long creature couldn't exist.
But if it did, it would certainly not be composed of anything we can conceive of as a body.
Naturally, it would still not be immune from the basic laws of physics. I imagine it would experience the universe in a completely different way than what we do. So much different, that we and it probably wouldn't recognise each other as even being alive.
Joined: 11/29/2009
Msg: 25
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 12/18/2009 6:36:31 AM

Thanks. You've given me a perspective that I do not understand, lol. Maybe it is that I am too sleepy. I understand the concept, just not the application or how-to of it all. And I don't say that because I do not feel there is a productive application, but because I feel there is and I honestly cannot grasp it right now.

This will be thought food for me for the next week or so! Cheers!

Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 30
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 9/28/2010 11:42:51 PM
No, there is an absolute reference frame.

Congrats, you have run up against the concept of relativity. Now, with a little exploration into Maxwell, you may discover something (again).
 Jan Sobieski
Joined: 7/4/2008
Msg: 31
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 9/28/2010 11:50:59 PM
This may be of interest to the OP and others : Betrand Russell - ABC of Relativity

Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 32
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 9/29/2010 4:51:53 AM
Basically, I'm asking, 'does the size of an observer effect the observers time frame?

Sure. You can't have a structure that would have to violate physical laws to exist. Nuclei can only be so large. Atoms can only be so large. People can only be so large. You can easily see that a person could not be anywhere near that large by looking at the difficulty with controlling the mars lander due to the lag time of the signals back and forth. In order to coordinate movements, you have to control parts of your body in a causal fashion, which means you need to be conscious of your body over timelike intervals. Even if signals propagated at the speed of light (which is far faster than real nerve impulses travel), you'd limit body size to timelike intervals of a fraction of a second.

No, there is an absolute reference frame.

There is no absolute reference frame. It's impossible to make relativity consistent with any absolute reference frame.
Joined: 9/26/2010
Msg: 34
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 10/4/2010 10:22:17 PM

what exactly is it about a 6 billion lightyear tall man that would violate our physical laws?

Well- for just one example, bone strength is in proportion to the cross-sectional area of the bones- so the width x depth of the bone, whereas body mass itself is in proportion to the volume, l x w x d. Any proportional increase in body size by any factor is going to be difficult to support, as doubling a person's overall proportions puts 8 times the strain on bones which only have 4 times the strength. This is one of many reasons why you could never have a fifty foot tall person- and our "6 Billion Light Year Man" would have long ago collapsed in on his own gravitational field.

Setting aside the very limiting rules of conventional biology for now:
Time dialation is a tricky business. It's true that mass can affect time between frames of reference, but the other counteracting factor is radial distance from the center of mass, so strictly speaking time slows down around DENSER objects. The slower time is compared to outside observation, the denser your object is to its scwharzchild radius and the point of black hole formation; long before you reach time dialation on a scale you're speaking of, you're going to need an incredibly strong crystalline/metallic/neutronic structure to resist its own internal tidal forces that is unlikely to permit any complexity that allows for life as we know it or can comprehend it, wavable arms included.

If you wanted to propose a cognition in electromagnetism in metalline/crystalline lattice or else a slow reacting mind in complex chemical reactions in attenuated dust clouds... that might be possible as far as laws of relativity go. Whether they could satisfy the philosophy of theory of mind, organic/non-organic chemistry, etc. etc. is up for debate. But it certainly makes for a harder to imagine thought-experiment.
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 35
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 10/5/2010 11:43:07 AM
Time slows down around larger objects does it not?

No. Time slows down near massive objects from the perspective of observers who are far from the massive object. In the frame of the massive object, (which in this case isn't even well-defined), time ticks along the same as it does for any other observer in his own frame of reference. In addition, the proper time (which is what a clock measure as it propagates along its own spacetime trajectory), is an ivariant and does not depend on the reference frame used to make the measurement. Unfortunately, expositions of relativity written for lay readers gloss over the details in order to explain phenomena from the perspective of an observer in a particular set of spacetime coordinates, namely ours here on Earth.

If you want to get a better appreciation for time dialation, then consider the following. Two observers, each in their own rocket ship pass each other and synchronize their clocks to read the same time. Later they compare their clocks, which observer sees what? The answer is that both see the other's clock as running slower than their own. You cannpt talk about time dialation without specifying what the dialation is relative to. Time is never dialated in one's own reference frame.
Joined: 3/9/2009
Msg: 36
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 9/4/2011 9:04:57 PM
At best:
Nothing about this scenario has meaning. Your fingertip couldn't begin to move before light could travel from your brain to your fingertip, approximately the time it takes light to travely 1/2 of your 6B ly height. Wait about 3B years, and in another 3B years after that you'd affirm that your finger responded to your command.

At worst:
Your finger would move at about the same tangential velocity as a normal human, or so I'm guessing. Essentially stationary. What's worse, humans aren't rigid bodies and process signals on a more human scale on the order of 200 mph. If that's the case you could never perform any thought, much less action.

I think I'll leave it to 'abelian' from now on. I'm just a physics lackey.
Joined: 4/10/2009
Msg: 42
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 9/14/2011 6:10:51 PM
If you're 6 billion light years 'tall', then you'd be half the universe in length. Well, you and Dr. Crusher. If you moved your arm across your field of vision, someone from Earth would think 'oh shit'.

I could suspend disbelief, but you'd have to define exactly what's still true and what isn't. What laws of physics are broken and what aren't? Still okay to move my finger faster than light (other than in rush hour traffic, that is )
Joined: 10/29/2011
Msg: 44
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 3/2/2012 7:32:30 AM
why would i imagine myself that tall..................... are your tall obesse?
Joined: 9/20/2011
Msg: 45
view profile
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 3/2/2012 10:34:58 PM
If I were 6billion lightyears tall I imagine I wouldn't be able to see my hand in front of my face... but if I could, it's take so long to see that I had moved that sighr woud be useless anyways.
Besides, if earth people are watching, my hand is not in front of my face. It's on my c0ck and you're all a bunch of perverts
Joined: 1/20/2009
Msg: 46
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 3/4/2012 6:40:06 AM
But ... but ... what ever happened to the Square - Cube Law ... ?

An object undergoing a proportional increase in size has a new volume proportional to the cube of the multiplier and a new surface area proportional to the square of the multiplier. If we double the size (measured by length of the edge) of a cube measuring one foot on each side, for example, we quadruple its surface area but increase its volume by eight times. Newton's Second Law ("force = mass * acceleration") predicts a doubling of your imaginary size necessarily results in requiring four times the (imaginary) muscle power in order to move eight times the (imaginary) mass. Aye, I kin na see ha ye do it, laddie ... and then there's the Inverse Square Law ...
Joined: 3/2/2012
Msg: 47
Imagine that you are 6,000,000,000 lightyears tall.
Posted: 3/6/2012 3:23:28 PM

Such a lovely thought. Thread heaven.
I shall look into that.
Meanwhile, thank you for making me roar over your mini-cartoon on the thypewriter about threads.
I'm just a newbie, but you guys caught my eye.
Am very glad I stopped. Hilarious patter.
I know it's the beer. I never ever imagine myself more than a few light-years tall, and only when I have to hail a ship to get home again.

Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >