Sex God
Yes but keep your fingers away from the neck.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
*SHoogle* - Do you have a question?
Quote by smaug99
Who or what were the Massaganians? I saw a reference in the local paper to them being involved in a big scrap with the Salvation Army in our local town 125 years ago. Searched the web and encyclopedias but drawn a blank. Anyone have any ideas??
I can't find anything about it online but hopefully somebody may know something!
Sex God
Quote by smaug99
Who or what were the Massaganians? I saw a reference in the local paper to them being involved in a big scrap with the Salvation Army in our local town 125 years ago. Searched the web and encyclopedias but drawn a blank. Anyone have any ideas??
An idea but not a hard and fast answer: "Satta massagana" is a phrase in Aramaic, a language spoken in biblical times in the holy land, and means something like "Give praise to God continually". Small local religious sects in the 19th century were sometimes formed based on something as small as a particular religious phrase, and this is what I would guess this group were.
The phrase passed into Amharic, the language of Ethiopia, a language strongly connected with Aramaic, and is now a key religious phrase in Rastafarianism, and a song.
Should I get out more?
Sex God
Quote by keeno
Who would win a rowing race between actor Brian Cox oar TV presenter Hugh Scully?
What a load of rollox!
:lol: 
Sex God
Quote by keeno
Who would win a croquet match between Timmy Mallet and MC Hammer?
With a bit of luck, they'd knock one another out!
Quote by Sharif
If you went back in time and met your self would you cancel your self out and if you did would you ever reach the point where you went back in time in the first place.
Well.... it's been said that you would need an infinite amount of energy to be able to travel faster than the speed of light, therefore you wouldn't technically ever be able to travel back in time.
Does that answer your question?
Quote by Kiss
If you went back in time and met your self would you cancel your self out and if you did would you ever reach the point where you went back in time in the first place.
Well.... it's been said that you would need an infinite amount of energy to be able to travel faster than the speed of light, therefore you wouldn't technically ever be able to travel back in time.
Does that answer your question?
Hmmmm The amount of energy required is a tricky issue. Scientists are invariably wrong otherwise the new ones couldn't discover stuff. They originaly believed that man wouldn't be able to breath if they travelled faster than 20mph. :shock: Many people still believe this as can be witnessed everyday on motorways as the tribly clad drivers clog up the middle lane
Quote by keeno
If you went back in time and met your self would you cancel your self out and if you did would you ever reach the point where you went back in time in the first place.
Well.... it's been said that you would need an infinite amount of energy to be able to travel faster than the speed of light, therefore you wouldn't technically ever be able to travel back in time.
Does that answer your question?
Hmmmm The amount of energy required is a tricky issue. Scientists are invariably wrong otherwise the new ones couldn't discover stuff. They originaly believed that man wouldn't be able to breath if they travelled faster than 20mph. :shock: Many people still believe this as can be witnessed everyday on motorways as the tribly clad drivers clog up the middle lane
No new theory please Keeno!
While I agree scientists have got a lot of things wrong you can't really doubt physics (too much).Because Constancy of C is experioemental, not logical, hold on, actually it is logical. Just rmemebered Einstein's thought at age 12. Think of Einstein's thought experiment that he did, based upon Galilean (sp?) relativity principle "No one can detect from within an intertial system that it is at rest or moving"
Now, think of you carrying a mirror, and running at a speed of light. Can you see the reflction of yourself on the mirror?
1. If the relative velocity of light would have been C-C = 0 then you can never see your reflection.
2. But then (1) violates the relativity principle, you are at uniform velocity, and still you can say you are moving because you cannot see your reflection at mirror!
Ways to avoid this. (And both must be true...:lol
1. Speed of light must be C, relative to everything, and has to be a constant.
2. Consequence from (1), if anything catches up to the speed of light, that becomes intractable.
:D
Quote by Kiss
If you went back in time and met your self would you cancel your self out and if you did would you ever reach the point where you went back in time in the first place.
Well.... it's been said that you would need an infinite amount of energy to be able to travel faster than the speed of light, therefore you wouldn't technically ever be able to travel back in time.
Does that answer your question?
Hmmmm The amount of energy required is a tricky issue. Scientists are invariably wrong otherwise the new ones couldn't discover stuff. They originaly believed that man wouldn't be able to breath if they travelled faster than 20mph. :shock: Many people still believe this as can be witnessed everyday on motorways as the tribly clad drivers clog up the middle lane
No new theory please Keeno!
While I agree scientists have got a lot of things wrong you can't really doubt physics (too much).Because Constancy of C is experioemental, not logical, hold on, actually it is logical. Just rmemebered Einstein's thought at age 12. Think of Einstein's thought experiment that he did, based upon Galilean (sp?) relativity principle "No one can detect from within an intertial system that it is at rest or moving"
Now, think of you carrying a mirror, and running at a speed of light. Can you see the reflction of yourself on the mirror?
1. If the relative velocity of light would have been C-C = 0 then you can never see your reflection.
2. But then (1) violates the relativity principle, you are at uniform velocity, and still you can say you are moving because you cannot see your reflection at mirror!
Ways to avoid this. (And both must be true...:lol
1. Speed of light must be C, relative to everything, and has to be a constant.
2. Consequence from (1), if anything catches up to the speed of light, that becomes intractable.
:D
:inlove: Ooooo I love it when you talk physics :inlove:
Quote by keeno
If you went back in time and met your self would you cancel your self out and if you did would you ever reach the point where you went back in time in the first place.
Well.... it's been said that you would need an infinite amount of energy to be able to travel faster than the speed of light, therefore you wouldn't technically ever be able to travel back in time.
Does that answer your question?
Hmmmm The amount of energy required is a tricky issue. Scientists are invariably wrong otherwise the new ones couldn't discover stuff. They originaly believed that man wouldn't be able to breath if they travelled faster than 20mph. :shock: Many people still believe this as can be witnessed everyday on motorways as the tribly clad drivers clog up the middle lane
No new theory please Keeno!
While I agree scientists have got a lot of things wrong you can't really doubt physics (too much).Because Constancy of C is experioemental, not logical, hold on, actually it is logical. Just rmemebered Einstein's thought at age 12. Think of Einstein's thought experiment that he did, based upon Galilean (sp?) relativity principle "No one can detect from within an intertial system that it is at rest or moving"
Now, think of you carrying a mirror, and running at a speed of light. Can you see the reflction of yourself on the mirror?
1. If the relative velocity of light would have been C-C = 0 then you can never see your reflection.
2. But then (1) violates the relativity principle, you are at uniform velocity, and still you can say you are moving because you cannot see your reflection at mirror!
Ways to avoid this. (And both must be true...:lol
1. Speed of light must be C, relative to everything, and has to be a constant.
2. Consequence from (1), if anything catches up to the speed of light, that becomes intractable.
:D
:inlove: Ooooo I love it when you talk physics :inlove:
my question is this, can you explain all that in english please.
Quote by Kiss
If you went back in time and met your self would you cancel your self out and if you did would you ever reach the point where you went back in time in the first place.
Well.... it's been said that you would need an infinite amount of energy to be able to travel faster than the speed of light, therefore you wouldn't technically ever be able to travel back in time.
Does that answer your question?
Hmmmm The amount of energy required is a tricky issue. Scientists are invariably wrong otherwise the new ones couldn't discover stuff. They originaly believed that man wouldn't be able to breath if they travelled faster than 20mph. :shock: Many people still believe this as can be witnessed everyday on motorways as the tribly clad drivers clog up the middle lane
No new theory please Keeno!
While I agree scientists have got a lot of things wrong you can't really doubt physics (too much).Because Constancy of C is experioemental, not logical, hold on, actually it is logical. Just rmemebered Einstein's thought at age 12. Think of Einstein's thought experiment that he did, based upon Galilean (sp?) relativity principle "No one can detect from within an intertial system that it is at rest or moving"
Now, think of you carrying a mirror, and running at a speed of light. Can you see the reflction of yourself on the mirror?
1. If the relative velocity of light would have been C-C = 0 then you can never see your reflection.
2. But then (1) violates the relativity principle, you are at uniform velocity, and still you can say you are moving because you cannot see your reflection at mirror!
Ways to avoid this. (And both must be true...:lol
1. Speed of light must be C, relative to everything, and has to be a constant.
2. Consequence from (1), if anything catches up to the speed of light, that becomes intractable.
:D
The thing is- she's probably spouting utter bollox- but I for one wouldn't have a feckin clue!
Quote by Shireen_Mids
Okay I am going to completely embarass myself here
I am trying to remember who sang the song "Love is a many splendid thing" (that's a cue for Splendid :lol2: ) from the film of the same name... Was it Matt Monroe or was it Andy Williams??
:dunno:
It's at the beginning of Grease though
(showing her class of film :giggleCx
