Jump to content

Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum

Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum. Like most online communities you must register to post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process. To be a part of BrainDen Forums you may create a new account or sign in if you already have an account.
As a member you could start new topics, reply to others, subscribe to topics/forums to get automatic updates, get your own profile and make new friends.

Of course, you can also enjoy our collection of amazing optical illusions and cool math games.

If you like our site, you may support us by simply clicking Google "+1" or Facebook "Like" buttons at the top.
If you have a website, we would appreciate a little link to BrainDen.

Thanks and enjoy the Den :-)
Guest Message by DevFuse


Member Since 01 Jun 2012
Offline Last Active Jun 01 2012 07:33 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Think about these

01 June 2012 - 07:34 PM

1. Let's say (hypothetically) there is a bullet, which can shoot through any barrier. Let's say there is also an absolutely bullet-proof armour, and nothing gets through it. What will happen, if such bullet hits such armour?
In my oppinion they would negate, almost like matter and anti-matter. One is an absolute, and so is the other one. Most times when this happens both things obliterate and at execedeling volitile levels if the theoretical physicists got it right on the stage of matter development. So realistically they would neglect to occur in our universe anymore not so much distroeyed but manuvered, for to break the laws of the universe one must not be of it a.k.a. godly action? or cross universal action? or both? or niether?
"If we could only have stood back and watch our universes creation, we would have never been a part of it, and the question wouldn't matter than anyway cause it was not your universe to ask about."

2. Can a man drown in the fountain of eternal life?

Are you allowed to take scuba gear? just kidding, but until someone figures out what the exact composition of eternal life is I'm worring about what its made of. It could be a pool of souls that doesn't interfere with breathing (don't know if they do or dont ps just guessing), but if it was water then no one couldn't cause water is the building block of your life, so if you die in it your molecules break into knew chemicals which form new bonds, which make new living things.. example algae or certain lichens that are literally created to break down chemical conditions in the oceans which would be more life so in his current form in water no, but living on yes cause his living material even if it would take some time would come back to a state of living. p.s. on earth :)

3. Your mission is to not accept the mission. Do you accept?
Well I guess i fail, hope that ones not on the afterlife test if there is one and its required to get a 100%... then again I hapily fail any test that I might be constantly able to retake. Why you might ask that i be happy? Simply because the question is perfectly implausable which means its a constant better to know you'll always fail but can try to succeed. Is much better than to succeed constantly and run out of questions... To know everything is to know absolutely nothing at all (another favorite).
4. This girl goes into the past and kills her Grandmother. Since her Grandmother is dead the girl was never born, if she was never born she never killed her grandmother and she was born.
Ok probably the best way to tackle this one is first to go back in time you could find yourself reassembled from your particles, as your particles make up the idea that is you (isn't lovely to be a physical metaphore) so to go back in time your particles would pretty much have to be possibly ripped from any previous state or form in that time and assembled to be you, not to mention that they would have to reflavor themselves from their current state to yours so possible dire consequences... like you know reassembling the past to format your future impossible and create intense amounts of chemical, nuclear, and atomic processes that release lots of energy or require it. This is why in my oppinion even if you went back in time its more plausible that it would be not that exact time but an alternate universe because you being there would be the altered particles that did not exist at that universal momment. So maybe she could go back and kill her grandmother befiore her birth but seeing as a ton of your information is genetic you might succeed in doing that just by traveling, and instead of killing your grandmother you would be killing your alternate grandmother and therefor the grandmother from your universe/demension could give birth to you just to alter the other demension. Which also makes coming back an alternate universe/demension/reality so effectively she would succeed at all the steps but fail at truely killing herself, just by the fact her matter is the matter of here and now which was there but different back then, and will be present but different in the future.

6. Answer truthfully (yes or no) to the following question: Will the next word you say be no?
Only if i prediposed the answer before you even asked the question, and even then you'ld have to blatently ignore the question the person asked so maybe it can be done but an ignorant to the question, psychic, and out right rude person would be required.. and honestly do we need anymore of them who say yes before they even know what their getting into...

7. What happens if you are in a car going the speed of light and you turn your headlights on?
I like my universe so lets not try this one haha, but if they did turn them on it would only be constant, and no one but something else taveling the speed of light would be able to see the result as to everyone else anything else slower you would be instantaneous in action a.k.a. they couldn't possibly see you turn the lights on they thought that is how it already was. I guess a better question is if you were traveling the speed of light and something traveling as neer the speed of light possible without being it could even register the action. So if you hit your head"lights" they could only posibly move at the same rate you are and would lovingly tear the universe to shreds as commented before by the fact that the car has mass with a big result of try not using friction to slow down... Cabhooom infinite explosion! Better keep on moving if you get there and there wont be much left after you pass by or stop.


In Topic: Think about these

01 June 2012 - 05:37 PM

Not a problem. God creates a pebble and then declares "I shall never pick it up". He is capable of lifting it, but can not break his promise. Conditions met.

But the conditions were not defined that this is his action, his action/ his verb (thats whats happening ^_^) is that he is unable, so he is capable of not being capable of lifting the stone which is in itself the "screwy-ness," of the paradox. If it said that god said he would not pick it up you would be 100% correct, but because his action is to not be capable of the other action, he is an entity by definition, so he as an individual is incapable. If he could it would mean he is capable of being impossible to his own rules. Which as god by definition would be possible, because he can do the impossible. So if god exists he should be capable of breaking the rule he set in place, by definition of being omnipotent. So I like to look at this one as god might not be who he says he is if he can't lift the rock. If he could he would be god... again paradox haha... :duh:

In Topic: A few sentences from life

01 June 2012 - 05:16 PM

These are not paradoxes, they are just not complete/intelligent statements. The fact that people say them and/or harp on them points to the general lack of common sense these days.

1. Nobody goes to that restaurant, because it is too crowded. What is meant is no one who knows how crowded it is goes to that restaurant. Obviously, if it is crowded, SOMEbody goes to that restaurant. It is an over-generalization (for lack of a better term), which are rarely true.

2. Don't go near the water, till you have learned how to swim. What is meant is don't go in the water in an uncontrolled setting, till you have learned how to swim. Obviously, the easiest way to learn to swim is by going in the water, but in a controlled setting, with someone to teach you who can ensure your safety until you can ensure your own safety.

3. The man who wrote such a stupid sentence, can not write at all. Add the word "well" between "write" and "at" and you will get the meaning desired.

4. If you get this message, call me, and if you don't get it, don't call. Obviously. This goes right with speakers in large rooms who say "If you can't hear me, raise your hand" Duh. <!-- s:roll: --><!-- s:roll: -->

5. ADVERTISEMENT: Are you an analphabet? Write a letter and we will send you free of charge instructions how to undo it. I saw a similar thing on Letterman many years ago ... reading a billboard that said simply: "Illiterate? Call 1-800-555-1212". Hopefully, the authors of these statements aren't expecting large responses. They'd do better on the radio ... Posted Image

Not to disagree...(paradox hehe) but these are paradoxes by logical progression. Because of the way they were written they become paradoxes. If they were to be explained the way you explained them they would have been written that way. However by the choice of words, their sequencing, and by gramatic and word definition if you follow their order they are paradoxes. If this wasn't true we would have no paradoxes because you could use the same words to define them differently in a new sentence and then remove them from paradoxical conversation. So by logical progression they dont make sence by our rules therefor they are paradoxical. A.K.A. when you make the rules it sucks when they break haha :thumbsup:

In Topic: paradox existence paradox

01 June 2012 - 03:02 PM

I think that a statement exists the instant it is conceived of. If you think " I will go bowling today", then that idea is conceived and the idea then exists. And although it is true that it doesn't have to be physics denying, it is also true that some paradoxes are physics denying.

Very intelligent viewing of it flamebride, and I agree a paradox isn't a lie because it could be true but proves itself false by predisposition, but predisposition is just the nueral networks of your brain coming to a conclusion on a topic of choice based off of previous experience. The cognition of the thought is real beacause the chemicals in your brain are allowing for the creation of that thought based off of old chemical imputs. So the way I like to think of it is, as you have a dual reality in your own existence. Your thoughts are real because they are chemical, but how you think of them is in nueral connections preceived in your imagination/ cognitive thought. So its plausable to have thoughts that are paradoxical because they are your neural responce, but it technically is just a streaming of constant chemical flow and those chemicals are real and follow all processes and rules of universal law. Our brains in my oppinion are the creaters of chaos because we can so easily create faulises, but in a real way. So its easy for us to trick ourselves, for the connections you draw from are momments so small in universal construction that they mean nothing in retrospect yet the universe wouldn't function without you operating the way you do so we are everything from almost nothing! I like to add this is my personal belief as to offend no one.