Just a hello and pre-emptive I told you so

[sunbeam]

Hi, I'm one of the Tebow Cultists.

I posted here a few times last season, but my post here is going to be about Fox.

Now, I'm not one of your regulars, so there is absolutely no reason anyone will remember what I posted.

But it is simply this: Fox has one good year, then it is followed by a bad year.

It's that simple. It probably has to do with quantum mechanics or karma or something. If you want a simpler explanation I'd say it is because he is a super conservative coach. So far it seems like he has had to cede a bit of control over the playcalling to appease Manning (is he calling them here?).

But it won't last. Sooner or later you guys are going to hit a skid, and Fox is going to be... Fox.

Wait and see.

On the up side, you are scheduled to have a good year with Fox next year. So you might want to consider not canning him after this year. Who knows, it might be a superbowl year for you.

But I'd wager dollars to doughnuts (don't take me up on that, doughnuts aren't something that should be shipped by package) that you guys finish 8-8 or worse this year. Probably worse. Depends on whether Fox can keep himself from getting involved with the offense.

Okay, that's it. See you at the end of the season.

Unless for some reason, oh I don't know, Tebow has a good run in NY and reels off some wins.

Then I'll be back. Oh I'll be back with a vengeance, baby.

[Mike]

Okay, that's it. See you at the end of the season.

Unless for some reason, oh I don't know, Tebow has a good run in NY and reels off some wins.Then I'll be back. Oh I'll be back with a vengeance, baby.

In that case, see ya next year. Oh, and, cool story.

[Thnikkaman]

I like Trains


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKB4h9gvmm0

[BeefStew25]

I just pooped out of my peehole.

[Thnikkaman]

I just pooped out of my peehole.

Peepoops?

I make angry lemonade.

[UnderArmour]

But it is simply this: Fox has one good year, then it is followed by a bad year.

It's that simple. It probably has to do with quantum mechanics or karma or something. If you want a simpler explanation I'd say it is because he is a super conservative coach. So far it seems like he has had to cede a bit of control over the playcalling to appease Manning (is he calling them here?).


We went 8-8 last year and had almost no business being in the playoffs from a regular season standpoint. That's not exactly a "good year" so by your logic we should be in the Super Bowl. So uh, thanks for jumping back on the Bronco bandwagon?

[Northman]

Thats ok, i told you Tebow would be a backup and nothing more. Looks like im a genius.

[PatriotsGuy]

It's week 2

[hotcarl]

i agree with everything you said. THE MANNING EXPERIMENT IS OVER

lets see what the kid can do

[OrangeHoof]

Every time I watch Manning get sacked I think "And there goes our season".

[Buff]

Do you have frosted tips? I'll bet you do.

[catfish]

for the record I think this game is a one off for Manning, and the D looked very dangerous keeping you in a game that should have been out of hand. I think you guys will have a great year. You all know my stance on Tebow, but Manning was the right move

[jhns]

So we had a great year at 8-8. Now we are going to have a bad year, going 8-8.

LOL

You sure have the intelligence of a Teblower.

[catfish]

So we had a great year at 8-8. Now we are going to have a bad year, going 8-8.

LOL

You sure have the intelligence of a Teblower.

expectations are a bit higher with Manning. 8-8 and playoffs following 4-12 season with Orton/Tebow as QB is different than 8-8 following 8-8 after spending 20 mil on a new QB. Just saying it is all relative, oh and I hate the Teblower name, I am a Tebow fan and consider myself a rational guy. That is just unnecessarily offensive

[camdisco24]

Do you have frosted tips? I'll bet you do.

http://images.teamsugar.com/files/upl2/1/15259/19_2009/34fdbff5ffd5cae1_GuyFieri.xlarger.jpg

[Northman]

expectations are a bit higher with Manning. 8-8 and playoffs following 4-12 season with Orton/Tebow as QB is different than 8-8 following 8-8 after spending 20 mil on a new QB. Just saying it is all relative, oh and I hate the Teblower name, I am a Tebow fan and consider myself a rational guy. That is just unnecessarily offensive

I dont think he was necessarily talking to you Cat. I think most people know your more middle ground on all things Tebow.

[turftoad]

Tebow is a punt protector, and a damn good one at that. :salute:

[MOtorboat]

Yup.

One bad game....and here they come a runnin'.

Morons.

[MasterShake]

Just a goodbye and preemptive I don't give a ****.

Soooo... goodbye and I don't give a ****.

[weazel]

I let my rice krispies get soggy in the milk before I ate them this morning

[chazoe60]

Can a MOD please move this piece of shit thread to smack where it belongs?


Eat shit btw. These are the kind of people that make all Tebow fans look like mouth breathing idiot mongoloid morons.

[jhns]

expectations are a bit higher with Manning. 8-8 and playoffs following 4-12 season with Orton/Tebow as QB is different than 8-8 following 8-8 after spending 20 mil on a new QB. Just saying it is all relative, oh and I hate the Teblower name, I am a Tebow fan and consider myself a rational guy. That is just unnecessarily offensive

Manning is on a new team after not playing for over a year. We have a harder schedule. It is all relative, and you make the excuses for Tebow. You fail to mention that he was a first round pick. Should first round picks not have expectations? It doesn't matter though, as this team is winning more than 8 games. They are currentlt playing the hardest part of the schedule as they learn how to play together. They sure don't look like a .500 team to me.

I don't care what you think. The op was offensive to me. Should we hold each other and cry it out?

[Foochacho]

Fire Fox. apparently he threw three picks last night. What a ********. I didn't know the season ended in week 2 this year either.

LOL, Fox is awesome. Our D has no depth but still looks pretty damn good. Porter got confused for a couple TD's while playing nickle and yet with four turnovers we were still in it. I just love not having a scrub like "Wink" running our defense. I hope De; Rio sticks around I think with a real safety and some linebacker depth our D could be brutal for years to come.

[Foochacho]

By the way sunbeam you make some shitty appliances.

[jhildebrand]

I have said it and will continue to say it:

Denver has to be careful not to let SD run away with the division. Their schedule is much easier. This team has to find a way to be 4-2 or 3-3 at worst by the start of week 7 or it will be fighting for the WC.

[slim]

Tebow magic would have won that game.

I wish Peyton had magic.

[topscribe]

Peepoops?

I make angry lemonade.
The Orioles won last night.
.

[catfish]

Manning is on a new team after not playing for over a year. We have a harder schedule. It is all relative, and you make the excuses for Tebow. You fail to mention that he was a first round pick. Should first round picks not have expectations? It doesn't matter though, as this team is winning more than 8 games. They are currentlt playing the hardest part of the schedule as they learn how to play together. They sure don't look like a .500 team to me.

I don't care what you think. The op was offensive to me. Should we hold each other and cry it out?

I'm not going to let this devolve into personal attacks, so I will go through this retort line by line and respond

1 Manning is on a new team after not playing for over a year. We have a harder schedule. Expectations after coming off a losing season were low then starting 1-4 they were even lower 8-8 with a playoff win was way more than any rational fan expected last season, hence a succesfull season by most reasonable measures, the team proved that it can be an 8 win team with a mediocre to bad passing QB leading the team (defines Tebow or Orton). They spent a lot of money significantly upgrading the QB position another 8-8 season would be considered a failure. That is all I was trying to get across there. Lack of playing time and strength of schedule could be reasons for the failure, but it would still be a failure.

It is all relative, and you make the excuses for Tebow. You fail to mention that he was a first round pick. Should first round picks not have expectations? Who is making excuses for Tebow? I didn't mention him at all in that post except to say that if he could take this team to 8-8 Manning should do much better. I personally dont feel excuses need to be made for him. IN his first 16 starts he took a losing team, with tons of help by the D and special teams to the playoffs after a shitty start by Orton, then was replaced by a qb who is better than all but maybe 4 guys in the NFL in the last 20 years. Do I think he should have been traded, no, but I understand why he was. No need to excuse anything

They are currentlt playing the hardest part of the schedule as they learn how to play together. It was one loss, who cares, the whole premise of the post was to address why it would be considered a failure if they lost 8 games, while it could be considered a success last year. Beside which for 8-8 to happen they will need to lose a lot more than just games in the hard part of the schedule.

They sure don't look like a .500 team to me agreed, my point was not that they would be .500, just to say why .500 would be a failure.

I don't care what you think. The op was offensive to me. Should we hold each other and cry it out? The OP didn't mention anything about you. (Unless you are John Fox, in which case stay the course you guys will be fine) He made some outlandish statements about the Broncos head coach and you responded by using an insult to all Tebow fans. I don't expect you to hug it out, but treating people with a little respect goes a lot further towards making for good football conversation. At the very least insult the person who offended you and not an entire group of people. There are several posters on here who I disagree with on most everything(MO , Rav), but I do respect their football insight and enjoy the debate, and would never sink to insults.

[chazoe60]

Why the **** is this GD abortion still in Broncos Talk? Move this shit to smack or better yet the Black Hole. Tned, dock all these lazy ass MODs' pay, they're slacking.

[catfish]

Why the **** is this GD abortion still in Broncos Talk? Move this shit to smack or better yet the Black Hole. Tned, dock all these lazy ass MODs' pay, they're slacking.

it is pretty transparent trolling :)

[WARHORSE]

Hi, I'm one of the Tebow Cultists.

I posted here a few times last season, but my post here is going to be about Fox.

Now, I'm not one of your regulars, so there is absolutely no reason anyone will remember what I posted.

But it is simply this: Fox has one good year, then it is followed by a bad year.

It's that simple. It probably has to do with quantum mechanics or karma or something. If you want a simpler explanation I'd say it is because he is a super conservative coach. So far it seems like he has had to cede a bit of control over the playcalling to appease Manning (is he calling them here?).

But it won't last. Sooner or later you guys are going to hit a skid, and Fox is going to be... Fox.

Wait and see.

On the up side, you are scheduled to have a good year with Fox next year. So you might want to consider not canning him after this year. Who knows, it might be a superbowl year for you.

But I'd wager dollars to doughnuts (don't take me up on that, doughnuts aren't something that should be shipped by package) that you guys finish 8-8 or worse this year. Probably worse. Depends on whether Fox can keep himself from getting involved with the offense.

Okay, that's it. See you at the end of the season.

Unless for some reason, oh I don't know, Tebow has a good run in NY and reels off some wins.

Then I'll be back. Oh I'll be back with a vengeance, baby.



Shut.

Up.

[catfish]

I dont think he was necessarily talking to you Cat. I think most people know your more middle ground on all things Tebow.

I am sure he didn't mean me specifically, but when you paint with a broad brush it affects many. I don't mind calling someone an idiot if it is deserved, but stick to the guy who is being an idiot, like for instance someone who ****s up a jinx thread right before the Atlanta game

[slim]

I am sure he didn't mean me specifically, but when you paint with a broad brush it affects many. I don't mind calling someone an idiot if it is deserved, but stick to the guy who is being an idiot, like for instance someone who ****s up a jinx thread right before the Atlanta game

******* up the unjinx thread should be grounds for a permaban.

[Thnikkaman]

Bey Bey bey bey bey
bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

bey

BEY!!!

[weazel]

In physics, spacetime (or space–time, space time or space–time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. Spacetime is usually interpreted with space as being three-dimensional and time playing the role of a fourth dimension that is of a different sort from the spatial dimensions. From a Euclidean space perspective, the universe has three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. By combining space and time into a single manifold, physicists have significantly simplified a large number of physical theories, as well as described in a more uniform way the workings of the universe at both the supergalactic and subatomic levels.
In non-relativistic classical mechanics, the use of Euclidean space instead of spacetime is appropriate, as time is treated as universal and constant, being independent of the state of motion of an observer. In relativistic contexts, time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space, because the observed rate at which time passes for an object depends on the object's velocity relative to the observer and also on the strength of gravitational fields, which can slow the passage of time.
In cosmology, the concept of spacetime combines space and time to a single abstract universe. Mathematically it is a manifold consisting of "events" which are described by some type of coordinate system. Typically three spatial dimensions (length, width, height), and one temporal dimension (time) are required. Dimensions are independent components of a coordinate grid needed to locate a point in a certain defined "space". For example, on the globe the latitude and longitude are two independent coordinates which together uniquely determine a location. In spacetime, a coordinate grid that spans the 3+1 dimensions locates events (rather than just points in space), i.e. time is added as another dimension to the coordinate grid. This way the coordinates specify where and when events occur. However, the unified nature of spacetime and the freedom of coordinate choice it allows imply that to express the temporal coordinate in one coordinate system requires both temporal and spatial coordinates in another coordinate system. Unlike in normal spatial coordinates, there are still restrictions for how measurements can be made spatially and temporally (see Spacetime intervals). These restrictions correspond roughly to a particular mathematical model which differs from Euclidean space in its manifest symmetry.
Until the beginning of the 20th century, time was believed to be independent of motion, progressing at a fixed rate in all reference frames; however, later experiments revealed that time slowed down at higher speeds of the reference frame relative to another reference frame (with such slowing called "time dilation" explained in the theory of "special relativity"). Many experiments have confirmed time dilation, such as atomic clocks on board a Space Shuttle running slower than synchronized Earth-bound inertial clocks and the relativistic decay of muons from cosmic ray showers. The duration of time can therefore vary for various events and various reference frames.
When dimensions are understood as mere components of the grid system, rather than physical attributes of space, it is easier to understand the alternate dimensional views as being simply the result of coordinate transformations.
The term spacetime has taken on a generalized meaning beyond treating spacetime events with the normal 3+1 dimensions. It is really the combination of space and time. Other proposed spacetime theories include additional dimensions—normally spatial but there exist some speculative theories that include additional temporal dimensions and even some that include dimensions that are neither temporal nor spatial (e.g. superspace). How many dimensions are needed to describe the universe is still an open question. Speculative theories such as string theory predict 10 or 26 dimensions (with M-theory predicting 11 dimensions: 10 spatial and 1 temporal), but the existence of more than four dimensions would only appear to make a difference at the subatomic level.
The first reference to spacetime as a mathematical concept was in 1754 by Jean le Rond d'Alembert in the article Dimension in Encyclopedie. Another early venture was by Joseph Louis Lagrange in his Theory of Analytic Functions (1797, 1813). He said, "One may view mechanics as a geometry of four dimensions, and mechanical analysis as an extension of geometric analysis".[4]
After discovering quaternions,[5] William Rowan Hamilton commented, "Time is said to have only one dimension, and space to have three dimensions. ... The mathematical quaternion partakes of both these elements; in technical language it may be said to be 'time plus space', or 'space plus time': and in this sense it has, or at least involves a reference to, four dimensions. And how the One of Time, of Space the Three, Might in the Chain of Symbols girdled be." Hamilton's biquaternions, which have algebraic properties sufficient to model spacetime and its symmetry, were in play for more than a half-century before formal relativity. For instance, William Kingdon Clifford noted their relevance.
Another important antecedent to spacetime was the work of James Clerk Maxwell as he used partial differential equations to develop electrodynamics with the four parameters. Lorentz discovered some invariances of Maxwell's equations late in the 19th century which were to become the basis of Einstein's theory of special relativity. Fiction authors were also involved, as mentioned above. It has always been the case that time and space are measured using real numbers, and the suggestion that the dimensions of space and time are comparable could have been raised by the first people to have formalized physics, but ultimately, the contradictions between Maxwell's laws and Galilean relativity had to come to a head with the realization of the import of finitude of the speed of light.
While spacetime can be viewed as a consequence of Albert Einstein's 1905 theory of special relativity, it was first explicitly proposed mathematically by one of his teachers, the mathematician Hermann Minkowski, in a 1908 essay[6] building on and extending Einstein's work. His concept of Minkowski space is the earliest treatment of space and time as two aspects of a unified whole, the essence of special relativity. (For an English translation of Minkowski's article, see Lorentz et al. 1952.) The 1926 thirteenth edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica included an article by Einstein titled "Space–Time".[7]) The idea of Minkowski space led to special relativity being viewed in a more geometrical way.
However, the most important contribution of Minkowski's geometric viewpoint of spacetime turned out to be in Einstein's later development of general relativity, since the correct description of the effect of gravitation on space and time was found to be most easily visualized as a "warp" or stretching in the geometrical fabric of space and time, in a smooth and continuous way that changed smoothly from point-to-point along the spacetime fabric.
Spacetimes are the arenas in which all physical events take place—an event is a point in spacetime specified by its time and place. For example, the motion of planets around the sun may be described in a particular type of spacetime, or the motion of light around a rotating star may be described in another type of spacetime. The basic elements of spacetime are events. In any given spacetime, an event is a unique position at a unique time. Because events are spacetime points, an example of an event in classical relativistic physics is , the location of an elementary (point-like) particle at a particular time. A spacetime itself can be viewed as the union of all events in the same way that a line is the union of all of its points, formally organized into a manifold, a space which can be described at small scales using coordinates systems.
A spacetime is independent of any observer.[8] However, in describing physical phenomena (which occur at certain moments of time in a given region of space), each observer chooses a convenient metrical coordinate system. Events are specified by four real numbers in any such coordinate system. The trajectories of elementary (point-like) particles through space and time are thus a continuum of events called the world line of the particle. Extended or composite objects (consisting of many elementary particles) are thus a union of many world lines twisted together by virtue of their interactions through spacetime into a "world-braid".
However, in physics, it is common to treat an extended object as a "particle" or "field" with its own unique (e.g. center of mass) position at any given time, so that the world line of a particle or light beam is the path that this particle or beam takes in the spacetime and represents the history of the particle or beam. The world line of the orbit of the Earth (in such a description) is depicted in two spatial dimensions x and y (the plane of the Earth's orbit) and a time dimension orthogonal to x and y. The orbit of the Earth is an ellipse in space alone, but its world line is a helix in spacetime.[9]
The unification of space and time is exemplified by the common practice of selecting a metric (the measure that specifies the interval between two events in spacetime) such that all four dimensions are measured in terms of units of distance: representing an event as (in the Lorentz metric) or (in the original Minkowski metric)[10] where is the speed of light. The metrical descriptions of Minkowski Space and spacelike, lightlike, and timelike intervals given below follow this convention, as do the conventional formulations of the Lorentz transformation.
In a Euclidean space, the separation between two points is measured by the distance between the two points. A distance is purely spatial, and is always positive. In spacetime, the separation between two events is measured by the invariant interval between the two events, which takes into account not only the spatial separation between the events, but also their temporal separation. The interval between two events is defined as:
(spacetime interval),
where c is the speed of light, and Δr and Δt denote differences of the space and time coordinates, respectively, between the events.
(Note that the choice of signs for above follows the space-like convention (−+++). Other treatments reverse the sign of .)
Spacetime intervals may be classified into three distinct types based on whether the temporal separation () or the spatial separation () of the two events is greater.
Certain types of world lines (called geodesics of the spacetime) are the shortest paths between any two events, with distance being defined in terms of spacetime intervals. The concept of geodesics becomes critical in general relativity, since geodesic motion may be thought of as "pure motion" (inertial motion) in spacetime, that is, free from any external influences.
For physical reasons, a spacetime continuum is mathematically defined as a four-dimensional, smooth, connected Lorentzian manifold . This means the smooth Lorentz metric has signature . The metric determines the geometry of spacetime, as well as determining the geodesics of particles and light beams. About each point (event) on this manifold, coordinate charts are used to represent observers in reference frames. Usually, Cartesian coordinates are used. Moreover, for simplicity's sake, the speed of light is usually assumed to be unity.
A reference frame (observer) can be identified with one of these coordinate charts; any such observer can describe any event . Another reference frame may be identified by a second coordinate chart about . Two observers (one in each reference frame) may describe the same event but obtain different descriptions.
Usually, many overlapping coordinate charts are needed to cover a manifold. Given two coordinate charts, one containing (representing an observer) and another containing (representing another observer), the intersection of the charts represents the region of spacetime in which both observers can measure physical quantities and hence compare results. The relation between the two sets of measurements is given by a non-singular coordinate transformation on this intersection. The idea of coordinate charts as local observers who can perform measurements in their vicinity also makes good physical sense, as this is how one actually collects physical data—locally.
For example, two observers, one of whom is on Earth, but the other one who is on a fast rocket to Jupiter, may observe a comet crashing into Jupiter (this is the event ). In general, they will disagree about the exact location and timing of this impact, i.e., they will have different 4-tuples (as they are using different coordinate systems). Although their kinematic descriptions will differ, dynamical (physical) laws, such as momentum conservation and the first law of thermodynamics, will still hold. In fact, relativity theory requires more than this in the sense that it stipulates these (and all other physical) laws must take the same form in all coordinate systems. This introduces tensors into relativity, by which all physical quantities are represented.
Geodesics are said to be time-like, null, or space-like if the tangent vector to one point of the geodesic is of this nature. Paths of particles and light beams in spacetime are represented by time-like and null (light-like) geodesics, respectively.

[GEM]

Hi, I'm one of the Tebow Cultists.

I posted here a few times last season, but my post here is going to be about Fox.

Now, I'm not one of your regulars, so there is absolutely no reason anyone will remember what I posted.

But it is simply this: Fox has one good year, then it is followed by a bad year.

It's that simple. It probably has to do with quantum mechanics or karma or something. If you want a simpler explanation I'd say it is because he is a super conservative coach. So far it seems like he has had to cede a bit of control over the playcalling to appease Manning (is he calling them here?).

But it won't last. Sooner or later you guys are going to hit a skid, and Fox is going to be... Fox.

Wait and see.

On the up side, you are scheduled to have a good year with Fox next year. So you might want to consider not canning him after this year. Who knows, it might be a superbowl year for you.

But I'd wager dollars to doughnuts (don't take me up on that, doughnuts aren't something that should be shipped by package) that you guys finish 8-8 or worse this year. Probably worse. Depends on whether Fox can keep himself from getting involved with the offense.

Okay, that's it. See you at the end of the season.

Unless for some reason, oh I don't know, Tebow has a good run in NY and reels off some wins.

Then I'll be back. Oh I'll be back with a vengeance, baby.


And I wager that Tebow is and always will be a backup gimmick qb with the it factor. And I further wager that there will always be fans who hang from his nuts no matter what he does. I also wager that since you don't even know who calls our offensive plays, you don't know shit about the Broncos and should probably slink your sunbeam ass back to Tebow's nuts.

[jhns]

I don't care what you think. The op was offensive to me. Should we hold each other and cry it out? The OP didn't mention anything about you. (Unless you are John Fox, in which case stay the course you guys will be fine) He made some outlandish statements about the Broncos head coach and you responded by using an insult to all Tebow fans. I don't expect you to hug it out, but treating people with a little respect goes a lot further towards making for good football conversation. At the very least insult the person who offended you and not an entire group of people. There are several posters on here who I disagree with on most everything(MO , Rav), but I do respect their football insight and enjoy the debate, and would never sink to insults.

Your problem seems to be that you think this thread was made for good football conversation. You are just proving my point about Teblowers.

I didn't mention anything about you either. I said Teblowers. You are the one that decided to raise your hand and confirm that you are a Teblower. I liked Tebow. I defended him all of last season because he was by far this teams best option at QB. I'm not a Teblower though, because I don't act like the OP. I know his limits and I know going to Manning was the best decision this franchise has made in years.

[sneakers]

In physics, spacetime (or space–time, space time or space–time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. Spacetime is usually interpreted with space as being three-dimensional and time playing the role of a fourth dimension that is of a different sort from the spatial dimensions. From a Euclidean space perspective, the universe has three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. By combining space and time into a single manifold, physicists have significantly simplified a large number of physical theories, as well as described in a more uniform way the workings of the universe at both the supergalactic and subatomic levels.
In non-relativistic classical mechanics, the use of Euclidean space instead of spacetime is appropriate, as time is treated as universal and constant, being independent of the state of motion of an observer. In relativistic contexts, time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space, because the observed rate at which time passes for an object depends on the object's velocity relative to the observer and also on the strength of gravitational fields, which can slow the passage of time.
In cosmology, the concept of spacetime combines space and time to a single abstract universe. Mathematically it is a manifold consisting of "events" which are described by some type of coordinate system. Typically three spatial dimensions (length, width, height), and one temporal dimension (time) are required. Dimensions are independent components of a coordinate grid needed to locate a point in a certain defined "space". For example, on the globe the latitude and longitude are two independent coordinates which together uniquely determine a location. In spacetime, a coordinate grid that spans the 3+1 dimensions locates events (rather than just points in space), i.e. time is added as another dimension to the coordinate grid. This way the coordinates specify where and when events occur. However, the unified nature of spacetime and the freedom of coordinate choice it allows imply that to express the temporal coordinate in one coordinate system requires both temporal and spatial coordinates in another coordinate system. Unlike in normal spatial coordinates, there are still restrictions for how measurements can be made spatially and temporally (see Spacetime intervals). These restrictions correspond roughly to a particular mathematical model which differs from Euclidean space in its manifest symmetry.
Until the beginning of the 20th century, time was believed to be independent of motion, progressing at a fixed rate in all reference frames; however, later experiments revealed that time slowed down at higher speeds of the reference frame relative to another reference frame (with such slowing called "time dilation" explained in the theory of "special relativity"). Many experiments have confirmed time dilation, such as atomic clocks on board a Space Shuttle running slower than synchronized Earth-bound inertial clocks and the relativistic decay of muons from cosmic ray showers. The duration of time can therefore vary for various events and various reference frames.
When dimensions are understood as mere components of the grid system, rather than physical attributes of space, it is easier to understand the alternate dimensional views as being simply the result of coordinate transformations.
The term spacetime has taken on a generalized meaning beyond treating spacetime events with the normal 3+1 dimensions. It is really the combination of space and time. Other proposed spacetime theories include additional dimensions—normally spatial but there exist some speculative theories that include additional temporal dimensions and even some that include dimensions that are neither temporal nor spatial (e.g. superspace). How many dimensions are needed to describe the universe is still an open question. Speculative theories such as string theory predict 10 or 26 dimensions (with M-theory predicting 11 dimensions: 10 spatial and 1 temporal), but the existence of more than four dimensions would only appear to make a difference at the subatomic level.
The first reference to spacetime as a mathematical concept was in 1754 by Jean le Rond d'Alembert in the article Dimension in Encyclopedie. Another early venture was by Joseph Louis Lagrange in his Theory of Analytic Functions (1797, 1813). He said, "One may view mechanics as a geometry of four dimensions, and mechanical analysis as an extension of geometric analysis".[4]
After discovering quaternions,[5] William Rowan Hamilton commented, "Time is said to have only one dimension, and space to have three dimensions. ... The mathematical quaternion partakes of both these elements; in technical language it may be said to be 'time plus space', or 'space plus time': and in this sense it has, or at least involves a reference to, four dimensions. And how the One of Time, of Space the Three, Might in the Chain of Symbols girdled be." Hamilton's biquaternions, which have algebraic properties sufficient to model spacetime and its symmetry, were in play for more than a half-century before formal relativity. For instance, William Kingdon Clifford noted their relevance.
Another important antecedent to spacetime was the work of James Clerk Maxwell as he used partial differential equations to develop electrodynamics with the four parameters. Lorentz discovered some invariances of Maxwell's equations late in the 19th century which were to become the basis of Einstein's theory of special relativity. Fiction authors were also involved, as mentioned above. It has always been the case that time and space are measured using real numbers, and the suggestion that the dimensions of space and time are comparable could have been raised by the first people to have formalized physics, but ultimately, the contradictions between Maxwell's laws and Galilean relativity had to come to a head with the realization of the import of finitude of the speed of light.
While spacetime can be viewed as a consequence of Albert Einstein's 1905 theory of special relativity, it was first explicitly proposed mathematically by one of his teachers, the mathematician Hermann Minkowski, in a 1908 essay[6] building on and extending Einstein's work. His concept of Minkowski space is the earliest treatment of space and time as two aspects of a unified whole, the essence of special relativity. (For an English translation of Minkowski's article, see Lorentz et al. 1952.) The 1926 thirteenth edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica included an article by Einstein titled "Space–Time".[7]) The idea of Minkowski space led to special relativity being viewed in a more geometrical way.
However, the most important contribution of Minkowski's geometric viewpoint of spacetime turned out to be in Einstein's later development of general relativity, since the correct description of the effect of gravitation on space and time was found to be most easily visualized as a "warp" or stretching in the geometrical fabric of space and time, in a smooth and continuous way that changed smoothly from point-to-point along the spacetime fabric.
Spacetimes are the arenas in which all physical events take place—an event is a point in spacetime specified by its time and place. For example, the motion of planets around the sun may be described in a particular type of spacetime, or the motion of light around a rotating star may be described in another type of spacetime. The basic elements of spacetime are events. In any given spacetime, an event is a unique position at a unique time. Because events are spacetime points, an example of an event in classical relativistic physics is , the location of an elementary (point-like) particle at a particular time. A spacetime itself can be viewed as the union of all events in the same way that a line is the union of all of its points, formally organized into a manifold, a space which can be described at small scales using coordinates systems.
A spacetime is independent of any observer.[8] However, in describing physical phenomena (which occur at certain moments of time in a given region of space), each observer chooses a convenient metrical coordinate system. Events are specified by four real numbers in any such coordinate system. The trajectories of elementary (point-like) particles through space and time are thus a continuum of events called the world line of the particle. Extended or composite objects (consisting of many elementary particles) are thus a union of many world lines twisted together by virtue of their interactions through spacetime into a "world-braid".
However, in physics, it is common to treat an extended object as a "particle" or "field" with its own unique (e.g. center of mass) position at any given time, so that the world line of a particle or light beam is the path that this particle or beam takes in the spacetime and represents the history of the particle or beam. The world line of the orbit of the Earth (in such a description) is depicted in two spatial dimensions x and y (the plane of the Earth's orbit) and a time dimension orthogonal to x and y. The orbit of the Earth is an ellipse in space alone, but its world line is a helix in spacetime.[9]
The unification of space and time is exemplified by the common practice of selecting a metric (the measure that specifies the interval between two events in spacetime) such that all four dimensions are measured in terms of units of distance: representing an event as (in the Lorentz metric) or (in the original Minkowski metric)[10] where is the speed of light. The metrical descriptions of Minkowski Space and spacelike, lightlike, and timelike intervals given below follow this convention, as do the conventional formulations of the Lorentz transformation.
In a Euclidean space, the separation between two points is measured by the distance between the two points. A distance is purely spatial, and is always positive. In spacetime, the separation between two events is measured by the invariant interval between the two events, which takes into account not only the spatial separation between the events, but also their temporal separation. The interval between two events is defined as:
(spacetime interval),
where c is the speed of light, and Δr and Δt denote differences of the space and time coordinates, respectively, between the events.
(Note that the choice of signs for above follows the space-like convention (−+++). Other treatments reverse the sign of .)
Spacetime intervals may be classified into three distinct types based on whether the temporal separation () or the spatial separation () of the two events is greater.
Certain types of world lines (called geodesics of the spacetime) are the shortest paths between any two events, with distance being defined in terms of spacetime intervals. The concept of geodesics becomes critical in general relativity, since geodesic motion may be thought of as "pure motion" (inertial motion) in spacetime, that is, free from any external influences.
For physical reasons, a spacetime continuum is mathematically defined as a four-dimensional, smooth, connected Lorentzian manifold . This means the smooth Lorentz metric has signature . The metric determines the geometry of spacetime, as well as determining the geodesics of particles and light beams. About each point (event) on this manifold, coordinate charts are used to represent observers in reference frames. Usually, Cartesian coordinates are used. Moreover, for simplicity's sake, the speed of light is usually assumed to be unity.
A reference frame (observer) can be identified with one of these coordinate charts; any such observer can describe any event . Another reference frame may be identified by a second coordinate chart about . Two observers (one in each reference frame) may describe the same event but obtain different descriptions.
Usually, many overlapping coordinate charts are needed to cover a manifold. Given two coordinate charts, one containing (representing an observer) and another containing (representing another observer), the intersection of the charts represents the region of spacetime in which both observers can measure physical quantities and hence compare results. The relation between the two sets of measurements is given by a non-singular coordinate transformation on this intersection. The idea of coordinate charts as local observers who can perform measurements in their vicinity also makes good physical sense, as this is how one actually collects physical data—locally.
For example, two observers, one of whom is on Earth, but the other one who is on a fast rocket to Jupiter, may observe a comet crashing into Jupiter (this is the event ). In general, they will disagree about the exact location and timing of this impact, i.e., they will have different 4-tuples (as they are using different coordinate systems). Although their kinematic descriptions will differ, dynamical (physical) laws, such as momentum conservation and the first law of thermodynamics, will still hold. In fact, relativity theory requires more than this in the sense that it stipulates these (and all other physical) laws must take the same form in all coordinate systems. This introduces tensors into relativity, by which all physical quantities are represented.
Geodesics are said to be time-like, null, or space-like if the tangent vector to one point of the geodesic is of this nature. Paths of particles and light beams in spacetime are represented by time-like and null (light-like) geodesics, respectively.

I love this shit!

[Simple Jaded]

Have you guys seen GEM's avi?.......

[chazoe60]

Have you guys seen GEM's avi?.......
Seen it? I have it printed out and on the nightstand next to my bed, right between the kleenex and the lotion.



































I may have said too much.

[Simple Jaded]

Seen it? I have it printed out and on the nightstand next to my bed, right between the kleenex and the lotion.



































I may have said too much.
I use a sock.......

[chazoe60]

I use a sock.......

How do you get your foot up there? You must be flexible.

[Dzone]

lmao!!!!!oh ****!

[topscribe]

I love this shit!
Of course, Sneak, of all people, you would. :lol:
.

[Simple Jaded]

How do you get your foot up there? You must be flexible.

*cough* Not really.......

[BroncoNut]

I just pooped out of my peehole.

that can actually happen I think

[slim]

that can actually happen I think

Only if you have had your wanker in someone's turd cutter.

[BroncoNut]

Only if you have had your wanker in someone's turd cutter.

it's some type of operative error. I know where I heard about it. it was on a program called Manswers. it can happen surgically. when they explained it, it sounded a bit fishy though. like it would have to be done intesntionally. like how could anyone eff up connecting part of the colon to the ureter or whatever, you know?

[slim]

it's some type of operative error. I know where I heard about it. it was on a program called Manswers. it can happen surgically. when they explained it, it sounded a bit fishy though. like it would have to be done intesntionally. like how could anyone eff up connecting part of the colon to the ureter or whatever, you know?

Manswers? WTF is that?

I wonder if this happened to Chaz Bono (or to Chaz OE)?

[catfish]

it's some type of operative error. I know where I heard about it. it was on a program called Manswers. it can happen surgically. when they explained it, it sounded a bit fishy though. like it would have to be done intesntionally. like how could anyone eff up connecting part of the colon to the ureter or whatever, you know?

http://www.outpatientsurgery.net/news/2011/02/21-prostatectomy-patient-who-urinated-out-of-his-rectum-and-defecated-out-of-his-penis-suing-robot-maker

[BroncoNut]

http://www.outpatientsurgery.net/news/2011/02/21-prostatectomy-patient-who-urinated-out-of-his-rectum-and-defecated-out-of-his-penis-suing-robot-maker

omg, that is it Cat. It was a prostate procedure. I don't know if that is an isolated case. I would think the surgeon would really have to go out of his way to make that kind of mistake.

[BroncoNut]

Manswers? WTF is that?

I wonder if this happened to Chaz Bono (or to Chaz OE)?

Manswers answers questions like, can you fart so hard that you die with scientific basis or non basis. one was can a man give himself an apendectomy, the answer is yes becasue one man did in a bar. Manswers google it.

[slim]

Holy crap. That is bizarre.


"I started defecating out of my penis and releasing gas through the penis," said Mr. Dulski, in court documents. "I kind of panicked at that point."



Yeah, I'm not really sure why that would make anyone panic. Maybe grow a pair, dude.....jeeze.

[BroncoNut]

Holy crap. That is bizarre.



Yeah, I'm not really sure why that would make anyone panic. Maybe grow a pair, dude.....jeeze.

I wonder if that is the only case. just does not make sense at all to me.

[slim]

Manswers answers questions like, can you fart so hard that you die with scientific basis or non basis. one was can a man give himself an apendectomy, the answer is yes becasue one man did in a bar. Manswers google it.

I would think so. People give themselves all kinds of surgery. Kind of funny to think about, but they do.

[weazel]

I would think so. People give themselves all kinds of surgery. Kind of funny to think about, but they do.

I let a snake bite my pecker just so I could suck the poison out

[topscribe]

I let a snake bite my pecker just so I could suck the poison out
Only you could come up with that, Weaz.

(Unless maybe Beef . . . )
.

[slim]

Only you could come up with that, Weaz.

(Unless maybe Beef . . . )
.

Top, would you let Weazel suck the poison out of your dong?

[slim]

Top, would you let Weazel suck the poison out of your dong?

Let's assume it's a life or death situation.

[weazel]

LMAO I dont think I would suck the poison out of my own dong, I know where that things been!

[dogfish]

Thats ok, i told you Tebow would be a backup and nothing more. Looks like im a genius.

alright, i know everyone's all excited and riled up, but let's not get too carried away here. . .