*spoiler discussion* DO NOT READ BEFORE WATCHING AT LEAST ACT II OR WE\'LL KILL YOU!!! or something. | Act 1, 2 & 3 Discussion, Reviews, Music etc | Forum


Please consider registering

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_MemberList Members

Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

— Match —

— Forum Options —

Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
*spoiler discussion* DO NOT READ BEFORE WATCHING AT LEAST ACT II OR WE'LL KILL YOU!!! or something.
July 18, 2008
11:53 pm
Oxford, Mississippi
Member of the ELE
Forum Posts: 189
Member Since:
July 3, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Freeze-ray. It's good that it didn't work.

Stopping time isn't all it's cracked up to be. You stop time. That stops everything. Nothing moves; nothing breathes; nothing thinks; no lights shine; no heat eminates; no masses attract; nothing happens.

Sure, you could make it so only you, yourself, don't stop in time, but have fun suffocating and being crushed to death in the cold dark, as you could no longer move in the atmosphere that has now effectively turned solid at what would act like 0 degrees Kelvin, flash-freezing your body, and not to mention that your mass would continue to try to move forward for that one instant when time stopped the world rotating, which would shatter your body instantly in a confined space with only the oxygen left in your lungs to allow the pieces to fly about in 0-G for the instant before it is also frozen. Either that or the effective mass of the entire universe would become 0 and the absolute vaccuum would instantly rip you (and every atom of you) apart regardess of the flash-freeze.

As for the rest of us, would we just see someone die, instantly atomized, and our own time continue onward or would all of existence end? The idea of stopping time means stopping time relative to a time that continues on, which contradicts the concept of stopping time. So… you can't really stop time without stopping all existence.

Now what about stopping time for one object relative to real time? We're back into the “0-degrees Kelvin, not moving with the rest of the Universe” problem. It would be like a slow-motion nuclear explosion as the 0-degrees mass is forcibly driven into the ground or nearby object, shattering everything that passes by it, or flash-freeze everything nearby (including atmosphere), dragging everything with it, as it appears to be launched into space. Either that, or it would reduce the effective mass to 0, and the object would appear to simply blink out of our own existence with an enourmous thunder-clap as the air instantly collapses into the previously-occupied space with a force felt never before on this planet.

Bad idea. Really bad idea.

Or did I think way too much on this and should have left it with “he threw a car at my head”?

The gamut determines the acceptible range of conditions. It's Genius' Awesome Sauce in an 8oz. glass bottle with a cork stopper.
January 13, 2009
3:36 pm
Member of the ELE
Forum Posts: 110
Member Since:
December 11, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I think you put some valid points out there but I think the car was suffiencent enough for me at least.

I am The Green Dragon I leave no trail behind. I go about my evil deeds without stressing my mind. No one has ever caught up to me as they say. Then again people fear me more and more each day.
March 18, 2009
11:35 am

It wouldn't be like being at absolute zero, time is part of velocity. No time = no velocity.

Forum Timezone: UTC -8

Most Users Ever Online: 10

Currently Online:

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 667

Members: 1805

Moderators: 2

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 9

Topics: 482

Posts: 3668

Newest Members:

Administrators: Admin: 222