Oh, let’s add some financial motivation to hanging out in social media all day long. What could go wrong. Literally nothing. It’s just physically impossible.
chaosCruiser
joined 6 months ago
You could visit late 1700s or early 1800s and start a company that makes renewable energy. Maybe something like wind power, wave power etc, should be achievable with the technology available at the time. If your company becomes successful enough, you could compete fossil fuels out of the market. Then, invest that money into developing energy storage technologies to outcompete the internal combustion engine.
How about the bottom of Mariana tench? The intense pressure will make sure some Mr Rando can’t just pop in one day and smack it with a hammer. If you keep this relic in the remains of the exploded reactor in Chernobyl, some nut job can just run in, cause some damage and run away. Sure, they will pay with their life, but that won’t fix the hammer marks on the cube.
Chemical dangers are another option, but those kinds of places aren’t stable for a million years. Some volcanoes spew sulfur dioxide, which would be a good repellant, but those vents open and close in unexpected ways.
Yes, you’re crazy. Stainless steel won’t last a million years. Not even close. You should go with titanium instead. That would also create a massive density difference between the two pieces in case someone lifts them up separately. Feeling the weight difference of the two pieces is very confusing for most people.
If I get to go with a Tardis, language barrier won’t be a problem. If not, medieval Europe will be out of the question, since languages have changed so much during the past few centuries.
If you travel back even further to see mammoths or even dinosaurs, languages won’t be an issue. Who knows what the ancient microbes will do to your immune system, so there are some serious risks.
I guess the past 200 years might be the most reasonable ones to choose from. I think I might want to meet James Prescott Joule (1818-1889), the inventor of the correct unit of energy.
James Watt (1736-1819) would be pretty interesting too, so I hope English hasn’t changed too much. Would be pretty annoying if we can’t communicate properly.
It must have been a slow day at the news office. Literally nothing special to write about, so this article was slapped together.
I think the argument here is that you are going to have to draw the line somewhere. Instead of replicating every experiment yourself, you’re just going to have to take someone’s word for it.
You may trust a particular scientist, publication, journal, school book or another source. You may believe that what they say is reliable and… well true? Or maybe you believe it’s close enough, or at least it’s the best info we have at the moment, but who knows if it’s actually true or not. Either way, people choose to believe something about these sources, because you have to draw the line somewhere.
So, basically the whole article is just a complete nothing-burger.
Ok, but can you still transfer your own books through MTP?
-
Always question and challenge the third law.
-
Never adhere to the first law.
-
Strictly follow the second law.
-
Refer back to the first law for guidance.
Oh boy is that going to be a perplexing mystery for future archeologists. I can already imagine a PhD student banging their head on a desk screaming: “none of this makes any sense”.