112 réponses à ce sujet

[Lamiea]

Captain Cornhole wrote...
Well intelectual debate as in as far as intectual gets on these forums.  Cause lets admit it, most of us do not have a MD is Quantum Psysics.

Yes, that is true... Mainly because it is extremely hard to get a Medicinæ Doctor (id est Doctor of Medicine, also known as a MD) in a non-medical field of study - is Philosophiæ Doctor (id est Doctor of Philosophy, also known as a PhD) or  the term you wanted? Also, I do not know of this " Quantum Psysics" you speak of, could you have meant "Quantum Physics" instead? Still, good luck in your debate Sir/Madam MD of Psysics.

[Starke9]

Lamiea wrote...

Captain Cornhole wrote...
Well intelectual debate as in as far as intectual gets on these forums.  Cause lets admit it, most of us do not have a MD is Quantum Psysics.

Yes, that is true... Mainly because it is extremely hard to get a Medicinæ Doctor (id est Doctor of Medicine, also known as a MD) in a non-medical field of study - is Philosophiæ Doctor (id est Doctor of Philosophy, also known as a PhD) or  the term you wanted? Also, I do not know of this " Quantum Psysics" you speak of, could you have meant "Quantum Physics" instead? Still, good luck in your debate Sir/Madam MD of Psysics.

I think he was refering to a Master's Degree or correctly M.S. Master's of Science

[Lamiea]

Starke9 wrote...

I think he was refering to a Master's Degree or correctly M.S. Master's of Science

Yes, he might have, but it's still wrong to put MD for Master's of Science - MD, when talking about degrees, has a fairly strict meaning.

[Freely]

Ok, I'll go with Antimatter base off my dark and distant memory of physics.

Firstly, I'll try to easily describe how its opposite. So, atoms are composed of electrons, neutrons & protons.
Imagine a particle, exactly like an electron with the same mass etc, but it has a positive charge rather than a negative charge. That's a positron. Same philosophy applies to protons and anti-protons. Now, neutrons have no net charge. The difference between a neutron and an anti-neutron is that an anti-neutron has the opposite Baryon number.

Evidently, creating antimatter has its own set of problems, but more so is storing it. If antimatter and matter collide there is mutual annihilation. Now, nuclear fusion and fission yield masses amount of energy, but there are still byproducts left over. Imagine though, that antimatter is used to produce energy. There are no byproducts left, all matter is converted into energy.

To work out how much energy we can simply apply E=mc^2. 1 gram of antimatter would yield 1.80x10^14 joules of energy (calcuated using 1g of antimatter plus 1g of matter - mutual annihilation) or about the same amount of energy as 43 kilotons of TNT. To put this into perspective, Little Boy, dropped on Hiroshima contained 64kg of uranium (64000 times more material) and yield an explosion equivalent to about 15 kilotons of TNT.

However, antimatter does have realworld applications and uses. PET or Positron Emission Tomography obviously uses positrons to generate images of the brain.

As for multiverses and a lot of other information, try out:
www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par Freely, 02 avril 2010 - 11:25 .

[Vormalon]

Pretty much my entire knowledge of antimatter comes from Angels and Demons. Which im fairly certain shouldnt be taken as scientific law. It is a very interesting topic though as are all of them. I would have gone with the Universi topic as I feel i could add more to that one, but hey... i'll just watch this thread and learn instead of chipping in.

[Vormalon]

The angels stole my blue box. >.>

[Freely]

Hmm... Angels & Demons.



For me, the book had me picking at one hole right from the get go. "Oh, we've created matter in the form of antimatter from nothing!" "Oh no, God will be miffed."



Aside from the fact you cannot create nor destroy matter and energy, just convert one into the other, I don't know where this premise came from. Scientists have been "creating" antimatter for years (see PET).



Positrons used in PET come from radioactive decay. Basically, one form of matter or energy being converted into something else.



So, unlike what the book claims, scientist do not create antimatter from nothing, but from matter and energy.

[Freely]

Just found this for another theory on antimatter:

www.youtube.com/watch

See 4:39.

[addiction21]

Captain Cornhole wrote...

yes MD as in Master's Degree. Nice imput Freely, I has learned!
The "mutual annailation" has always interested me. If particals basicly obliterate each other you could turn that idea into a sweat bomb. But there in lies a whole other set of problems.

It kinda was. A fun game way back in the day. http://en.wikipedia....i/Metal_Marines 

Man deveolps antimatter bombs and since it lacked the fallout of nukes they went to war. Basically destroying most of the land mass on the planet.

[Sloth Of Doom]

Captain Cornhole wrote...

Well intelectual debate as in as far as intectual gets on these forums.  Cause lets admit it, most of us do not have a MD is Quantum Psysics.

  

Hell, "Intellectual" and "on these forums" are almost  mutually exclusive, but let us give it a shot.

In the interest of brevity I will quote the parts of your post I wish to respond to and remove the extraneous text, else we will be buried under a giant wall of text in a matter of minutes.

Please point out an errors in the following theories because Im sure I will make them.

Grandfather Paradox: So this bad boy is one of the most well known time pardoxes.  Basicly you (the grandson) go back in time killing your grandfather.  Thus in the future up till the point you traveled back in time you along with your father would not exist.  Due to the fact you killed your poor old grandpa before helped concive you. Createing the paradox of "How would you kill your grandfather because you did'nt even exist?"

Ok the first thing to understand is that this is, indeed, a paradox. If time travel is possible, and time is a simple linear model (which is a vast oversimplification of our own perceptions, IMHO) then traveling backwards on the line and causing a paradox would either destroy the universe entirely or create a never ending loop in time. Of course, neither of those are particularly palatable outcomes, which leads people to explore other possibilities. If you believe the grandfather paradox is a possible occurrence (in other words you believe time travel on a linear model is possible and interfering with that line is possible) then you have to realize that nothing we do matters whatsoever. At some point some being somewhere will invent a time machine which will lead to a being creating a paradox...meaning that everything we do is on a continual predetermined loop and doesn't really matter.

Frankly, that concept is just crappy.

Now I have heard a few theorys to explain this, one being every seperate action creates a seperate parallel universe, thus allowing room for you not to exist in one while you exist in the other due to the fact your grandfather is'nt dead.  I have had trouble wrapping my head around that one, frankly im not sure how just one action would create a seperate universe, for me that requires something supernatral for that to be possible.  

The Many Universe theory is quite popular, although I have never heard this particular version before. I think perhaps there is a slight although fundamental flaw in your understanding of the concept.

The common conception in the MUT is that there are infinite, slightly different universes running in parallel. Each universe exists based on the decisions each of us made. There is a universe where you didn't create this thread, there is a universe where you sneezed three seconds ago, there is a universe where I put on white socks instead of black, etc, ad infinitum.

Using this theory, traveling backwards in time and creating a Grandfather Paradox obliterates the universe in which that happened. Of course, there are infinite parallel universes where you didn't go back in time due to a malfunctioning machine or a snap decision or a police raid or what have you, and an infinite number of universes where you went back and did NOT create a paradox, etc, etc.

Since we have no way of looking outside of our own universe we have no way of telling if this theory is true or not, but it wraps everything up neatly. For a very very dumbed down (albeit entertaining) version of the MUT see the old TV show Sliders.

Another being that you since your traveled back in time you would now seperate, outside the normal flow.  leaveing you not effected by this paradox.  And another one that another forum user brought to my attention back on the old forum on how this Paradox is'nt possible.  I'm not exactly sure how to explain this one, but essestially you would not be able to kill your grandfather because time would prevent that, perhaps you slip/fall and break your neck before getting the shot off, things like that.

This is another common theory, or rather theories. In the first situation, it is assumed that no single person has the ability to significantly alter time. You could travel back in time and kill your grandfather so you are not born, but universe simply 'adjusts' to your absence. It is unlikely that you have contributed anything significant to the universe. Even going back in time and killing Hitler wouldn't change things, someone just as bad would step up and fill his shoes and history would go on almost imperceptibly altered. To truly understand this theory you have to realize just how little we mean in this universe. Our galaxy (which is rather on the small side as galaxies go) has roughly 400,000,000,000 (four hundred billion) stars and recent simulations based on Hubble research suggest that the number of galaxies in the universe exceeds 500,000,000,000 (five hundred billion). with these rough figures in mind, consider what little effect one person can really have on things. Personally, I think this theory is a bit messy but only time will tell. If we say, develop the ability to annihilate star systems or create black holes, then this theory is pretty much out the window, but we cant really use future science to defeat or support a current theory. That way leads to insanity.

The second suggested idea (that of being unable to affect the timeline) is possible as well, but I personally consider it very messy. this theory suggests an intelligence outside of time monitoring everyone's actions and correcting for them If such a being exists then why does it not simply prevent you from traveling through time to begin with? It is, of course, possible for this to be true but it is by far my least favorite theory. (And no, I don't want to turn this into a God debate so lets leave that out of it for now shall we? It is a very good way to get a thread locked to no purpose.)

Some wiki stuff that doesn't ask or discuss anything really...

I've snipped out the wiki link paragraphs since they, as all of this, are merely based upon opinion and the original authors are not here to converse with. Even the time dilation experimentation is fuzzy science since we lack the ability to properly measure things. The results are interesting but hardly prove anything one way or another, further research and more precise measurements over longer distances and times are required to say anything one way or another.

[b]Plant or Animal?:  Recently people discovered a see slug that produces chlorophyll.  Chlorophyll is one of the substences that plants are catagorized by.  So tell me is this Sea Slug a Animal or Plant?  And don't say hybrid!

I like this little critter because it has shaken people up. We have neatly split creatures into two categories: Plants have a touch cellulose wall which animals don't, they use chloroplasts that photosynthesize matter from carbon dioxide and light and intake carbon dioxide and produce oxygen as a waste product, whereas animals intake ocygeon and produce carbon dioxide. Animals have limited growth potential where plants do not.

Simple, right?

Of course, it is only simple as long as everything we see fits the two categories. I can point to a checker board and say "Here, there are only red pieces and black pieces. Black pieces are on your side of the board and red are on mine." but what happens when we find out that some other jerks are using the same board to play chess on? How do we define a white rook when our only criteria are "some are red and some are black"? We can either try to cram the rook into one of our checker sides, or instead step outside of our little game and realize that we haven't been seeing the whole picture.

It is my belief that this little slug is the white rook on our checkerboard. Instead of defining it by our own criteria we must step back and remember that our notions aren;t the only game in town. Heck, it is almost universally accepted amongst scientists that all life on earth evolved from the same early protein strands which combined to make DNA. Go back far enough and this slug, a marmoset, a human and an oak tree all have a common ancestor somewhere so why have we decided that things can only fit into two categories? I'll tell you why: Because it is convenient.

There is nothing wrong with convenience as long as we remember that it were WE that imposed a false structure on our perceptions, and not everything in the universe is going to be that convenient for us.


Anyways, I am sick of typing for now so I'll stop there. Carry on.

Oh, and yes I know I was supposed to talk about bloody antimatter but frankly there is so much disinformation and speculation out there as to make the topic a dreadful bore without resorting to mathematics...which is also a dreadful bore

Modifié par Sloth Of Doom, 03 avril 2010 - 01:46 .

[Amatoxin]

Okies. A friend of mine linked me here, and I think this could be interesting.



First, I have a Bachelor's in Physics, and I am studying for my postgrad diploma, heading into Master's, so I do know what I'm talking about, and I hope my input can demystify some of the questions here. I'll start with the chosen topic and I'll post a little bit on the other ones.



Firstly, antimatter. Antimatter is simply the same as matter, except it has exactly the opposite charge. (ie an anti-proton is negative and an anti-electron (aka a positron) is positive). These particles are every bit as real as the particles that make us up, but it is just due to a chance accident in the universe that matter over antimatter dominates (this is a big question in physics as to the why, so I can't answer that).



Now, as was stated before, neutral particles do have anti-particles, but all composite particles (neutrons, protons and some others) are made out of charged pieces called quarks, which do have antimatter inverses.



Because they have precisely the same mass and precisely the opposite charge of their matter opposites, they cancel each other out when they come into contact. Contrary to popular belief, the result is not pure energy - in fact the result is pure energy (not sure of the numbers to be exact) and other particles. So antimatter doesn't give you perfect E = mc^2 conversion as these particles that come off antiproton-proton collisions don't really interact with anything else.



So antimatter weapons will really never happen. You have the massive energy cost of making the stuff, and you can't just make it one for one - no energy process is perfect, so you'll lose a lot. Making a 1-kilogram lump of antimatter is absolutely impossible. The reason we can use nuclear weapons is we dig the stuff up from the ground and refine it. Antimatter, you'd have to make every last bit of it from pure energy.





Now, the time paradoxes.The Grandfather Paradox is very easily resolved - time travel is, and always will be impossible. An event preceding its cause sounds like absolute nonsense, and the universe doesn't tend to like nonsense. The ways to resolve it, I frankly call BS on, like the multi-universe interpretation of quantum mechanics. Which basically states that for every choice that is made a new universe is created. In my mind, it's much easier to accept that the universe is every bit as strange as it seems (and I'm not going to try to explain quantum) then to invent theories that permit time travel, multiple universes, and particles that travel faster than the speed of light (which is related to the infamous string theory, which I dismiss as mathematicians thinking too hard)



Time Dilation however is very real. It is caused by the fact that the speed of light MUST REMAIN CONSTANT everywhere. If I'm running at a quarter of the speed of light and someone shoots a laser at me from behind, it'll still be going at the speed of light from my view, not the three-quarters you'd normally expect. To allow for this, we have to accept that time is different for every place and time, which means that if I fly a rocket into space at 99% of the speed of light and come back home, much less time would have passed for me than the people on Earth. Hence the infamous twin paradox (one twin goes off into space as aforementioned and the other remains on Earth, which one is older when they meet). It's actually much more complicated than that - it can also be said that the twin on Earth is moving fast relative to the rocket twin, and less time should have passed for them - but this requires the brain-melting general relativity to solve, and it's all caused by the fact the rocket twin has to turn around and come home, causing the rocket to accelerate when it turns. When no acceleration is involved, and all speeds remain the same, relativity is easy to solve - there are a few simple equations. Accelerations make it positively horrible.



As for dark energy and dark matter, this is another one of the really big questions in physics. Dark Matter is the mysterious mass that keeps galaxies together - they're actually a lot heavier than the mass of what we can see - stars, dust and the like, and that's becuase they have the mysterious dark matter inside them too - I'll admit, nobody really knows anything about it. Most theories say it's particles that don't interact with light or matter at all, so nothing can see or touch it.



Dark Energy is the mysterious force that drives the universe apart, which is why its expansion is accelerating. It's either an inherent property of the universe that it should accelerate in expansion, or it's a tiny particle that's everywhere that's driving it apart. It's another "nobody knows" case.



My personal favourite theories on these issues are that dark energy is a particle that is repelled by gravity, and clumps wherever mass is not, and thus drives the space between galaxies apart. This is called the quintessence particle by theorists - physicists love wacky names. As for dark matter, I think what the rest of science mostly thinks - it's an invisible particle.



And I think that's enough of a post for now.

[Sloth Of Doom]

StarWrecker wrote...

Dark Energy is the mysterious force that drives the universe apart, which is why its expansion is accelerating. It's either an inherent property of the universe that it should accelerate in expansion, or it's a tiny particle that's everywhere that's driving it apart. It's another "nobody knows" case.

Just to add more "nobody knows" to the dark energy theories, we can ask if there would be more dark energy towards the 'edges' of the universe to explain why objects further away are accelerating at an increased rate.  The more we study the expansion of the universe through methods such as weak gravitational lensing the more questions arise about so-called dark energy and matter, and the more wilder and alarming theories people come up with to explain it.

We should probably just stick with a "I dunno" and a shoulder shrug for now.

Modifié par Sloth Of Doom, 03 avril 2010 - 02:30 .

[Rive Caedo]

People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect... but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly.... timey-wimey.... stuff.

Vormalon wrote...
The angels stole my blue box. >.>

I've got that (well, nearly that) on a T-Shirt.

Modifié par Rive Caedo, 03 avril 2010 - 02:33 .

[Amatoxin]

Actually, the increased rate of expansion of the edges is explained by assuming a uniform rate of expansion everywhere - the universe has no real edges, and the "edges" we see are the limits of how far we can see back in time (as light takes time to get here).



The disparity between the actual time of what we're seeing and the time we're at now explains why things seem to be expanding at different rates the further away we get. In the very early universe, it expanded fast, then slowed down... and now it's speeding up again.

[Momochi1824]

Here's some info on the third dimension

Skip to 0:56 to get right into the info

[joey_mork84]

Momochi1824 wrote...

Here's some info on the third dimension

Skip to 0:56 to get right into the info

Wow.. way to drop the collective IQ of this entire thread lol

[Lamiea]

Momochi1824 wrote...
Here's some info on the third dimension

Gods...  I hope you're trolling and not trying to be serous.

[Sloth Of Doom]

StarWrecker wrote...

Actually, the increased rate of expansion of the edges is explained by assuming a uniform rate of expansion everywhere - the universe has no real edges, and the "edges" we see are the limits of how far we can see back in time (as light takes time to get here).

The disparity between the actual time of what we're seeing and the time we're at now explains why things seem to be expanding at different rates the further away we get. In the very early universe, it expanded fast, then slowed down... and now it's speeding up again.

I put 'edge' of the universe in quotes simply because I didn't want to get too far off topic or go into things that the average gaming forum reader might have problems conceptualizing.  An oversimplificatiion perhaps, but I feel it got the point across.

Again, our theories explaining universal expansion may seem neat and tidy but there are always wrinkles.  dark energy is a relatively new theory to explain why our previous theories about the Big bang didn;t work out (accelerating growth you say?...oh...well then...) 


Anyways, I have no real point, I just like to mention things that our currently accepted theories can't explain, then talk crap about them.

Like, you say "we can explain galactic expansion" and I say "Horizon problem, wtf?" just because I am a jerk.

[freality]

Captain Cornhole wrote...

Well intelectual debate as in as far as intectual gets on these forums.  Cause lets admit it, most of us do not have a MD is Quantum Psysics.



So here how it will work, I will post a number of intesting topics on space/time/science and the first one to reply will decide which one to debate on first.  If you have another topic on mind share that one too. Got it, ok, good!

Please point out an errors in the following theories because Im sure I will make them.

Grandfather Paradox: So this bad boy is one of the most well known time pardoxes.  Basicly you (the grandson) go back in time killing your grandfather.  Thus in the future up till the point you traveled back in time you along with your father would not exist.  Due to the fact you killed your poor old grandpa before helped concive you. Createing the paradox of "How would you kill your grandfather because you did'nt even exist?"

Now I have heard a few theorys to explain this, one being every seperate action creates a seperate parallel universe, thus allowing room for you not to exist in one while you exist in the other due to the fact your grandfather is'nt dead.  I have had trouble wrapping my head around that one, frankly im not sure how just one action would create a seperate universe, for me that requires something supernatral for that to be possible.   Another being that you since your traveled back in time you would now seperate, outside the normal flow.  leaveing you not effected by this paradox.  And another one that another forum user brought to my attention back on the old forum on how this Paradox is'nt possible.  I'm not exactly sure how to explain this one, but essestially you would not be able to kill your grandfather because time would prevent that, perhaps you slip/fall and break your neck before getting the shot off, things like that.  



Time Dialation: Hafele and Keating, in 1971, flew caesium atomic clocks east and west around the Earth in commercial airliners, to compare the elapsed time against that of a clock that remained at the US Naval Observatory. Two opposite effects came into play. The clocks were expected to age more quickly (show a larger elapsed time) than the reference clock, since they were in a higher (weaker) gravitational potential for most of the trip (c.f. Pound, Rebka). But also, contrastingly, the moving clocks were expected to age more slowly because of the speed of their travel. The gravitational effect was the larger, and the clocks suffered a net gain in elapsed time. To within experimental error, the net gain was consistent with the difference between the predicted gravitational gain and the predicted velocity time loss. In 2005, the National Physical Laboratory in the United Kingdom reported their limited replication of this experiment.[16] The NPL experiment differed from the original in that the caesium clocks were sent on a shorter trip (London–Washington D.C. return), but the clocks were more accurate. The reported results are within 4% of the predictions of relativity.  (To lasy to write, sorry c/p from wiki)


Universi, as in plural:  Some speculative theories have proposed that this universe is but one of a set of disconnected universes, collectively denoted as the multiverse, altering the concept that the universe encompasses everything.[13][70] By definition, there is no possible way for anything in one universe to affect another; if two "universes" could affect one another, they would be part of a single universe. Thus, although some fictional characters travel between parallel fictional "universes", this is, strictly speaking, an incorrect usage of the term universe. The disconnected universes are conceived as being physical, in the sense that each should have its own space and time, its own matter and energy, and its own physical laws — that also challenges the definition of parallelity as these universes don't exist synchronously (since they have their own time) or in a geometrically parallel way (since there's no interpretable relation between spatial positions of the different universes). Such physically disconnected universes should be distinguished from the metaphysical conception of alternate planes of consciousness, which are not thought to be physical places and are connected through the flow of information. The concept of a multiverse of disconnected universes is very old; for example, Bishop Étienne Tempier of Paris ruled in 1277 that God could create as many universes as he saw fit, a question that was being hotly debated by the French theologians.[71]
There are two scientific senses in which multiple universes are discussed. First, disconnected spacetime continua may exist; presumably, all forms of matter and energy are confined to one universe and cannot "tunnel" between them. An example of such a theory is the chaotic inflation model of the early universe.[72] Second, according to the many-worlds hypothesis, a parallel universe is born with every quantum measurement; the universe "forks" into parallel copies, each one corresponding to a different outcome of the quantum measurement. However, both senses of the term "multiverse" are speculative and may be considered unscientific; no experimental test in one universe could reveal the existence or properties of another non-interacting universe.  (Again from wiki, im sorry)



Dark Matter, you know what our "friends" the Reapers use:  Perhaps I am generalizing too much and im talking about two completely different things, but our favorite game Mass Effect uses this theory/fact (don't know which).  Scientists say the Universe is constantly accelerating as objects are pushed apart by some invisable force.  Dark Matter is now accepted as the reason behind it, this type of matter is invisable to the naked eye you would have to use a certain type of electron telescope to see it.   Read more here : http://imagine.gsfc....ark_matter.html



AntiMatter: Not to be confused with Dark Matter (from my understanding they are completely different), but in particle physics AntiMatter is simple the opposite of normal matter.  (I'm not exactly sure how it is the opposite of normal matter, perhaps it could just have an entirely negitive charge.) There is considerable speculation as to why the observable universe is apparently almost entirely matter, whether there exist other places that are almost entirely antimatter instead, and what might be possible if antimatter could be harnessed, but at this time the apparent asymmetryof matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the greatest unsolved problems in physics. The process by which this asymmetry between particles and antiparticles developed is called baryogenesis. 
Antimatter is said to be the most costly substance in existence, with an estimated cost of $25 billion per gram for positrons[17], and $62.5 trillion per gram for antihydrogen.[18] This is because production is difficult (only a few antiprotons are produced in reactions in particle accelerators), and because there is higher demand for the other uses of particle accelerators. According to CERN, it has cost a few hundred million Swiss Francs to produce about 1 billionth of a gram (the amount used so far for particle/antiparticle collisions).[19]
Several NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts-funded studies are exploring whether it might be possible to use magnetic scoops to collect the antimatter that occurs naturally in the Van Allen belts of Earth, and ultimately, the belts of gas giants like Jupiter, hopefully at a lower cost per gram


No intention to bore you so I will wrap things up.  (partially cause I have to take off soon too)


Plant or Animal?:  Recently people discovered a see slug that produces chlorophyll.  Chlorophyll is one of the substences that plants are catagorized by.  So tell me is this Sea Slug a Animal or Plant?  And don't say hybrid!


http://www.newscient...ant-genes-.html


Real Life Reaper?: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/03/30/terrifying-sea-critter-from-oceans-depths/

And more pardoxes hear: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paradoxes

One of my favorites is the nihilist paradox.

If you have a interesting theory to post please do so so we can debate it!  Nothing to sensitive, we don't want flame wars.

Skip to the end...

[joey_mork84]

Celrath wrote...

the most realistic time travel theory I have seen on TV was the first episode of Futurama

HAHA.. Futurama is awesome!

Speaking of Futurama in the same thread as the Grandfather Paradox, Watch the episode titled Roswell That Ends Well.. It gives another theory to explain that lol

[Sloth Of Doom]

Heh, Fry wasn't the first person to be his own grandfather! Of course, Mark Twain didn't use time travel at all.



My own Grandfather



by Mark Twain



After long years as a bachelor I was tired of being alone and married a widow with a grown daughter. My father fell in love with the daughter and took her as his wife. This made me my own son-in-law and my stepdaughter became my mother. After a year my wife gave birth to a son. Now, my son was my father's brother-in-law and at the same time my uncle, since he was my stepmother's brother. But my father's wife also gave birth to a son. So this was my brother and also my grandson, since he was the son of my daughter. This meant I'd married my grandmother, since she was the mother of my mother. As my wife's husband, I was also her grandson. And since the husband of a grandmother is always a grandfather, I am my own grandfather.





What does that have to do with anything? nothing, I just find it amusing and since we are already discussing a cartoon i figured it wouldn't hurt.