Member 1235
7 entries

Levi Ong (M, 32)
Quezon City, PH
Immortal since Dec 25, 2007
Uplinks: 0, Generation 3

  • Affiliated
  •  /  
  • Invited
  •  /  
  • Descended
  • Recently commented on
    From levi88
    Dealing with Paradoxes #1
    Now playing SpaceCollective
    Where forward thinking terrestrials share ideas and information about the state of the species, their planet and the universe, living the lives of science fiction. Introduction
    Featuring Powers of Ten by Charles and Ray Eames, based on an idea by Kees Boeke.
    An Explanation for Time Dilation

    I. Introductions and Stuff.

    A friend of mine posed a question to me: Why is it that at high velocities, time is affected? This is a phenomenon called Time Dilation, a very important component in the Theory of Relativity. So this got me thinking, and I believe I have arrived at a plausible explanation to this. Note that this phenomenon may have already been explained, but at the moment of writing, I am not aware of any such explanation, so I give my own.

    Anyway, to all those who aren't too confident about their grasp of physics and/or mathematics, please don't let the topic scare you. I will try to explain my idea in the simplest way I can, so that everyone (hopefully) can understand.

    The phenomenon of time dilation, simply put, is that when you travel inside a vehicle at very high speeds (presumably close to the speed of light), time slows down outside your vehicle (while time is normal to you inside your vehicle). Essentially, events occur much more slowly than they would if you were stationary.

    The first idea that came to my mind to explain this phenomenon (I honestly hadn't thought about why time dilates. I've always just thought it was a given.) is what i call the highway analogy.

    Imagine, if you will, a man walking on the sidewalk of a busy road. Cars zoom past him, all at the same speed. Naturally, you'd imagine that the cars coming towards him from ahead (i.e. backwards, assuming that the man is walking forward) would, to him, appear to be moving faster than the cars coming towards him from behind (i.e. forward in the same direction as the man). The faster the man walks, the cars moving backwards and forwards would appear to be moving even faster or more slowly, respectively.

    If you apply this analogy in terms of photons (particles of light) moving, you sort of get the picture that whatever visual information coming from behind you would reach you much more slowly than whatever's coming from ahead, in a sort of vague version of the doppler effect.

    But this model has a very glaring problem. If this model were correct, it'd mean that theoretically, at very high speeds, time would only slow down behind you, and speed up in front of you. Experimentally, this is incorrect. At high speeds, time slows down regardless of the direction relative to the moving observer.

    II. Preliminary Explanations.

    I believe I have found a way to sufficiently explain this phenomenon by modifying the highway analogy model. Thing is, it requires a 5th dimension to exist. I know it's hard to swallow, and I know it's tough on the imagination, but please bear with me.

    For those of you who haven't read my entry about the big bang, I will explain again how dimensions work.

    -Suppose you have a dot. It has zero dimensions. If you translate (move) it, you form a line, which has 1 dimension.
    -Now suppose you translate the line. You end up with a two dimensional square.
    -Translate the square, and you end up with a three dimensional cube.
    -Translate the cube, and you come up with a moving cube, essentially a solid object in motion. Given that time (denoted by "t") is a component in the 4th dimension, you can say that any moving object is a 4 dimensional object. When we want to find the rate at which this object moves, we use the formula v = d/t, where v is velocity, d is the distance traveled, and t being the time elapsed. Because we're talking about 3d space, d is a function of the x, y, and z axes. Thus, we have a situation which involves x, y, z, and t. 4 dimensions.

    Here is where it gets a little tricky, so we need to "simplify" a few things.

    Let's call the "moving object" an Event. The rotation of a cube is an event. My fingers typing on this keyboard is an event. Anything involving an object moving is an event.

    Now suppose we translate this Event. And so we have a fifth dimension, the axis of which I will denote as "w". To illustrate, we go back to the 4th dimension. As a translated cube is a moving cube, a translated event is an occurring event. The former can be described as the rate at which a cube moves, and the latter can be described as the rate at which an event occurs. (I hope this clarifies my choice of the word "occurring") Let's assume that the equation for finding this rate is R = e/w, where R is the rate at which the event happens, e is the event itself with x, y, z, and t components (in much the same way that d is made up of x, y, and z components) and w, being the 5th axis.

    As a side-note, you can also say that the first dimension is contained within the second, and that the second is contained within the third, so on and so forth. The fourth dimension is contained within the fifth.

    This may seem a bit confusing at first, but slow down and read again if you must. It isn't complicated at all.

    III. Discussion Proper.

    Let's go back to the highway analogy. Because the cars and the man are moving linearly in one direction, we can simplify things by assuming that they're moving solely along the x axis. This leaves the y and z axes "unoccupied", and thus unaffected by the "relativity" affecting the walking man. To the man, anything moving along the x axis is subject to relativity, because of the sole fact that he's moving. Anything moving in the same direction will be moving at an altered speed with respect to the walking man. This brings us back to the original flaw of this analogy.

    If we use the 5-dimensional model, however, we solve this problem. Instead of using cars, we use events. In the highway analogy, we have a 4 dimensional scene where the 3 dimensional objects are moving along one axis at a rate determined by time (or spacetime), the dimension in which the entire scene is contained. In the 5-dimensional model, we have a 5 dimensional scene where 4 dimensional events are occurring along one axis at a rate determined by w. If we let the axis in which the events occur to be time, then we "free" up the other three dimensions defined by x, y, and z. This means that very high "speeds", time slows down regardless of the spatial direction.

    Returning to the phenomenon wherein the high velocity of a moving observer slows down time (because the relationship between the moving observer and the 5-dimensional model is still a bit disconnected): I believe that this relationship is best described mathematically. (don't worry, nothing overly complex).

    v = d/t or the rate at which the object moves
    R = e/w or the rate at which an event occurs
    d contains x,y,z components
    e contains x,y,z,t components

    Given that d remains constant, at very high v's, t becomes very small.
    Because e contains x,y,z and t components, a smaller t indicates a smaller value for e.
    Given that w remains constant, at low values of e, R becomes small.

    Therefore, R, the rate at which an event occurs, decreases.

    And so, we arrive at the conclusion that the higher the velocity, the slower the rate at which events occur, and so the slower time will appear relative to the observer moving at said velocity.

      Promote (1)
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
    It sounds like you would meet that definition and viagra before pharmacy may be useful for you.
    Tue, Dec 25, 2007  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote (4)
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (1)
    During fourth year high school, I was introduced to Pascal's "Wager" by my (slightly psychotic[1]) english teacher. Basically, in Wager, Pascal concludes that it is favorable to have faith and believe in God, because, well... it's basically a good gamble. Let me expound:

    A man has two options: atheism and theism. In both cases, there is a gamble: the existence of God. Assuming that there is an equal (50-50) chance that God exists, there must be two outcomes for each options:

    1. Theism and God exists: Super win, because if you believe in God, you automatically get saved. (Never mind that you killed a billion people, you have faith, and only through faith do you get saved!)
    2. Theism and God doesn't exist: Oh well, at least you tried. Nothing good happens, but nothing bad happens either.
    3. Atheism and God doesn't exist: Same thing as #2
    4. Atheism and God exists: Holy shit, you're in deep shit!

    Based on the four possible outcomes, Pascal therefore concludes that theism is the way to go, because you have nothing to lose. Pretty neat, huh? It's all there, in nice, logical, mathematical[2] and probabilistic sense. There's no reason NOT to believe!

    But I didn't believe. And frankly, I was a little disgusted at Pascal for turning it into a business deal. If one were to believe in God because of that way of thinking... well, that's just wrong. If you are to believe in a god, you have to do it because you err... really do believe in him/her/it. And aside from that, who was he to say how God thinks? Hell, how is anybody to dictate the laws of divine nature? Christians say that a man cannot look at the face of God because it is so incomprehensible and divine that the man will die (of what, I do not know). They tell us not to question what God says because he is omnipotent and that his divine machinations cannot be comprehended by man.

    Then how is it that they know how heaven works? Even if it is written in the bible? Who wrote it? Seriously. Who WROTE it? Certainly not a disembodied pen possessed by our creator. It was apparently someone who, by the grace of the holy spirit (who is apparently also god, even though there are two other persons of god, namely god the father and god the son, but then there is only god, so it all sort of goes downhill from there) was inspired to write God's words[3]... But again, who said that the guy-who-wrote-god's-words was inspired? Another guy. Not god.

    Someone said that it is pride and hubris not to believe in God, because to deny his existence means to claim that man is superior, and that man doesn't need saving, etc...

    What then, do you call pretending to understand how a god works? OH, it's certainly not hubris. mhm, nope. It's just faith.[4]

    But I digress. Let me get back to my point against Pascal. As he[5] says, Pascal simplifies things too much. Again, you can't possibly predict how God acts, and even which god is the right god. It is from here that one should act. This is why atheism is a viable course of action.

    Consider this: You have a child, and you're separated from him or her(let's say "him" for simplicity's sake), and are forbidden to communicate in any way to him, and he's brought up by someone else. Consider the situation wherein your son is brought up being taught that he has to do good because he loves his parent (as catholics are taught). Now think about how you would feel. You'd feel good, because you know that your son wants to prove to you that he loves you, and that means that he does love you. (The fact that he tried to prove it, rather that the fact that he did good)

    But consider another situation. Your son was raised without knowing about you. He was only taught what was the right thing to do, and why it was the right thing to do. All his life, he did what was right because it was right. He didn't think about you at all whenever he'd do whatever he did. How would you feel? I imagine you'd feel bad. Real bad. Your son doesn't know who you are. Worse yet, he refuses to believe that you exist because you've never shown yourself. There are so many other people out there who claim to be your son's father, that he doesn't want to decide. He knows the history of all those "fathers' " children, and he doesn't want to be like them. And so he chooses not to believe that he has a father.

    It would hurt, wouldn't it? Your very own son, denying your existence.

    I myself would feel pretty bad. But I'd be proud. My son did the right thing all his life not because he was threatened with punishment, not because he loved me, not because of anything at all, except that it was the right thing to do.

    I would feel bad, yes. But i'd be proud; fucking proud.

    [1] She tried to exorcise us.

    [2] It involves economics and calculus, so I won't bother explain it here.

    [3] This was what I was taught in my catholic high school, so I'm not quite sure if it applies to all denominations of Christianity. Christianity is so divided.

    [4] I have no problem with God if he may exist. I have absolutely no beef with him. It's the religious organizations which i rail against.

    [5]  His blog entry is similar to mine in that he explains and attacks Pascal, but our arguments are ultimately different.
    Wed, Jan 30, 2008  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote (1)
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (2)
    Note: The following is fiction. Also, I poke fun at various religious views and if that offends you, then you have been duly warned.
    Edit: I forgot to mention: I will not stand for stupid, baseless and unfounded inflammatory comments. Please, if you're going to criticize my work and/or question my quality as a member, please do so in a formal, constructive, and sincere manner.
    Edit^2: A public apology to orizyn, whose compliment i misunderstood. Sorry. >.< Though, to the rest of y'alls, the above still stands, in case any ted haggards frequent spacecollective.

    The End of the World

    God sat on his Throne reading the month's issue of reader's digest and grunted. The bastards had cut the jokes portions of the book-zine on the account of the readers' tendency to read just the jokes and skip the rest of the serious material. It apparently made sense to them that cutting out the jokes will force the readers to read that oprish [1] stuff.

    Eh, he thought. I'm almost done anyway.


    It was the end of the world. Everyone religious (except the Gleeks) were both panicked and smug at the same time. The atheists and scientists just panicked.

    The T'mornikans, those who believed that T'mornik, the supposed son of god, was both man and... god, and that both halves were not really halves but actually whole, which logically would mean that the total was 200%, but that doesn't matter anyway, because only the Gleeks did math, knelt in their churches to pray. Some lashed themselves with whips made of fine black leather and wore fake spiked collars and various sorts of black leather garments, supposedly to atone for their sins, while others felt it better to nail themselves to giant triangles just as was done to T'mornik. They wailed and sobbed for the destruction that was to come, but secretly they waited in anticipation for the coming of the anti-T'mornik, which would prove conclusively that they were Right, and that only they would be saved (even if god loved everyone, just not the fags and scientists) while everyone else (the aforementioned fags, scientists and additionally, anyone who didn't follow the T'mornikans, especially those Kelyak bastards) burned in Hell.

    The Kelyak, followers of the sacred prophet Mamad, were at that very moment, sneaking around, surrounding the individual churches of the T'mornikans. They believed that if they killed those T'mornikan bastards, the apocalypse wouldn't be averted, but at least they'd all go to heaven and be given 72 big-breasted[2] virgins (sex unspecified) when the shit hit the fan.

    Those who accede to the Church of T'mornik (Not to be confused with the T'mornikans), which differs from the T'mornikans in that they believe that T'mornik wasn't really the son of god but was just a really swell guy who deserved to be followed, sat peacefully, unlike the T'mornikans, who were now whipping each other and shouting "you bad boy", in their very stylish churches. These churches had a very spiky, vertical appearance to them, which everyone noted had similarities to the designs of space rockets. The truth was that every church was indeed a spacecraft designed to launch the moment the world ended.

    The Gleeks were the only ones who didn't fear. According to their holy scripture, there have already been several preceding apocalypses, all of which have been brought about by god(s) and man's stupidity. By this time, however, a lot of belief in god(s) have waned, which in turn diminished their power, thereby preventing the apocalypse. This very relieving fact was preached by the Gleek priests, all of which believed in the power of non-belief. So they went about their daily lives, not-believing in the worst.

    Everyone else gave up on life, and listened to emo songs.


    God rummaged through the reading material within reach, looking for something even remotely interesting.


    Enrico sat on the pew with his relatives in a Church of T'mornik (not to be confused with a T'mornikan church), waiting for the building to lift off into space. Looking around, he saw other anxious people waiting for something - anything to happen. The fact was that the concrete and steel-rebar building didn't seem like it was going to launch anytime soon. He had watched enough movies to know that there had to be some really dramatic pre-launch sequence for any spacecraft followed by a countdown.

    He was already counting down well on the way to negative 52 when the priest went up to the podium.

    "Umm." Started the priest. "As you all may have noticed, we are not launching."

    The priest paused and waited for the mumbling to die down.

    "It will take a bit more time to fully read the manuals, but rest assured, we'll figure it out in time." There was a note of uncertainty in the last few syllables of his speech.


    In the meantime, the Kelyak, on their holy war, were getting ever closer to the T'mornikan churches (not to be confused with a Church of T'mornik).


    God hummed a lively tune while reading Time magazine. (Now that's funny.)


    The Kelyak made a quick prayer to Val'allah, and got themselves ready to storm the heathen church to kill the heathens (which were, by now, mostly walking on all fours, saying "i've been a bad boy")


    The priest of the Church of T'mornik (Not to be confused with the T'mornikans) fretted. For years he had devoutly followed the tenets laid down by Felix Manlow, the legendary founder who, inspired by the Holy Specter, denounced a large quantity of T'mornikan doctrine, and built a new religion based on his philosophies and personal beliefs. Perhaps it wasn't a good idea to stake the fate of one's soul on the teachings and thoughts of a single person. He shook the thought off, and continued to fret. For years he had been a faithful follower of a religion that might just be proven false just because he couldn't find a way to make this blasted thing blast off.

    He skimmed through the Holy Manual, which, when referring to the actual launching sequence, said something about throwing people out of the window. There had to be a symbolic meaning to this. It just didn't make sense to throw out the very people you want to save.

    Before he could continue his thoughts, the Kelyak Yeehawdis[3] attacked the church (apparently they did confuse it with the T'mornikan church), with AK-47's blazing, and accidentally shot a man, causing him to fall out the window.

    There was a low rumble.

    "Where are the whips?" Shouted the Yeehawdi commander. "Where is the leather?"

    "What are you talking about?" said the priest, calmly.

    "There should be whips!" The Kelyak man thought for a moment, and said: "Is this a T'mornikan church?"

    "Oh, no, no. This is a church of the Church of T'mornik. People tend to confuse us with them."

    "Oh. Sorry then. We'll be on our way."

    At this point, the rumbling was so strong that instead of stepping out, the Yeehawdis fell out. And then the rumbling got even stronger.

    The priest stared at the ancient texts slack-jawed, and came to the conclusion that defenestration is inescapable. It actually worked. With that, he commanded his people to throw themselves out the window. And when they mindlessly followed, sure enough, the thrust generated by the steady stream of people jumping off windows allowed the church to lift off.


    Far below, the Kelyak Yeehawdis got up, dusted their pants, fixed their turbans, and looked up at the flying church, which was spewing a steady stream of people. They shrugged, and attacked the T'mornikans next door, who were by now screaming in "pain" from the whips and lashes, and wedgies from the leather thongs.


    And as the empty Church of T'mornik flew off into space, the Kelyak Yeehawdis finished off the last of the T'mornikans, the scientists and atheists panicked in the background, the Gleeks went about their business,

    God wiped his ass, flushed the toilet, and the world ended.

    [1] Adj. Refers to the similarity with Oprah.
    [2] Can also mean "Barrel Chested", if taken in the context of males.
    [3] Holy warriors that fight for a Yeehawd, a holy war.
      Promote (3)
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
    Dealing with Paradoxes #1

    A strange thought occurred to me during my chemical engineering class, and it has something to do with predicting - with certainty - one's own future, and solving the metaphorical Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle application problem.

    Suppose you have a hypothetical machine that predicts the future and conveys the information to a person. We do not bother ourselves with how this machine works; only that it does. The inherent problem - and this is a rather notorious problem - is that the person, affected by the knowledge of what lay in store for him, will behave differently than if he hadn't seen the future; this would in turn produce a completely different future, contradicting what was previously predicted.

    To illustrate, imagine a man who uses the Hypothetical Machine™. He sees that in the future he will be a poor man who didn't graduate college, who is jobless, who is miserable and a whole lot of other disagreeable circumstances. The knowledge of this leaves an impression[1] in his mind, altering his reactions to future stimuli. He would start studying more, be more hardworking, etc... And this would result in a future that contradicts the Hypothetical Machine™'s prediction.

    But supposing the man uses the machine again for another prediction, Just To Make Sure. He'll see that because of his fear due to watching the first prediction, he works hard, studies more, etc... And eventually gets a nice job after graduating summa cum laude, gets married, and lives happily ever after. This in turn will leave another impression on the person's consciousness. He will feel contented with his own future knowing that he'll eventually end up having a good life. He will end up lazy, unmotivated, and revert back to the first situation where he doesn't graduated college, becomes jobless, ends up poor and miserable, etc... of course, with some minor differences.

    So we reach an impasse. How do you make it so that one can predict with certainty the future of a man, with the man knowing about that prediction, and still end up with a reliable prediction[2]?

    But suppose you rerun that machine again and again, and suppose the rerunning doesn't affect the subject's psychological condition. (i.e. he doesn't get tired, frustrated, or crazed by watching different versions of his life again and again) As the number of reruns approaches infinity, there should be some sort of equilibrium achieved. That is, a future that, upon observation by the subject, perpetuates itself.

    You have a solution that resembles something like the Nash equilibrium. Everyone's happy. The person ends up observing a future that he is satisfied with, and at the same time, is brought about by that feeling of satisfaction and the mindset created by the act of observation.

    Of course, with infinity, the whole thing is a moot point, because with the intention of watching it an infinite times, it'll end up predicting that, by 20 or 30 years, the subject will still be watching reruns. So for the sake of practicality, we assume that watching the predictions take only a short amount of time, and that "infinity" isn't really infinity, but a number large enough to reach very near the equilibrium point, and predicting the future not with certainty, but rather, near-certainty.

    Or with a ±0.01 deviation or something.

    [1] I'm aware that people have different reactions to different stimuli, but for the sake of argument, shut up.

    [2] Something like Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says something like the act of observing the location or momentum of a particle... makes the location or momentum of the particle uncertain. (i.e. given that you use a photon to observe the location of the particle, it must follow that the photon used to observe collides with the particle, moving it away, which results in another uncertain location, as well as general frustration.)
      Promote (5)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (1)
    Does viagra generic vs pfizer work for someone who doesn't have ED?
    Tue, Dec 25, 2007  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote (4)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Create synapse
    Note: I'm not sure if it's alright to post fiction, but i'll do it anyway. If it isn't allowed or is discouraged, please - let me know so i can take this down. Anyway, here's a piece of fiction I wrote with some fantasy and science fiction elements. (And actual - albeit twisted - physics concepts)

    How It All Began

    "Don't you ever think about it?" asked Professor Diggory Berker, as he stood tinkering with his latest invention. "How it all began?"
    "Everyone knows the chicken came first," said his student and assistant, Alfred Slurr.
    "No, no. How it all began." said Berker, tightening a nut. "You know, life."

    Diggory Berker, Professor of Applied Magic, sighed, put down his wrench, and sat down on a stool. He massaged his temples, which didn't really ache, but he did it anyway out of habit. He was tired; he had been working on his latest and most promising invention for three straight days. It was revolutionary.

    "What is that, anyway?" asked Slurr, pointing at the strange device.
    "It's a Righ Thand Rule," said Berker with a flourish. Finally, the fool noticed. "It measures the direction of the force exerted by a magical field."
    "A magical ruler?"
    "In a sense, yes - more of a protractor, really."

    Just then, the university bell started ringing, signaling the start of the evening classes which Alfred Slurr was (mostly) enrolled in. He hurriedly said good-bye, gave hastily concocted words of praise on the ingenuity of the professor's new invention, and left.

    Berker sighed again, and slumped on the work table. Nobody ever really took him seriously, not in his ten years of employment in the Massachusetts Institute of Thaumaturgy[1]. He was a good teacher - brilliant, really - for he had a knack for the theoretical aspects of his field that was shamefully lacking in many of his colleagues.

    For some reason, however, he was never able to apply his ideas on the workbench. Oftentimes, he'd get to work with something in mind only to come up something entirely different upon completion, inevitably at the cost of an entire section of the laboratory wing of the Applied Magic building. This was one of the reasons he was banned from any lab within the campus (and subsequently any lab within the country). The other reason was that he tended to nick from supply cabinets and storerooms the parts he used for his projects.

    And that was why he worked inside a broom closet, Illogically expanding the interior to the size of a full-fledged laboratory, while keeping the exterior untouched. He also hired the cleaning services of one Alfred Slurr, a failing student, in return for passing grades.

    He looked at the device (constructed of various doohickeys stolen from various supply cabinets and storerooms) and threw a wrench at it in his depression. He kicked over the table, toppling over the machine, kicked it across the room, and started for the door, limping for a sore toe and knocking over a shelf full of bottles of chemicals and his past inventions (that didn't explode, at least) on his way out.

    Just then, right before he slammed the door behind him, there was a whirr.


    Berker hunched over the glowing mass of trash that was his former invention, and prodded it with a stick[2]. The chemicals he spilled must've reacted to produce a magical current, powering his supposedly broken machine.

    ... Could it be?

    Berker took a peek at the rotating gimbal, which constituted the main output reading, and noted that the needle was pointing firmly away from him, with the secondary needle approximating the magnitude to be 300 kilomagi[3].

    "Hello," said the transintercomplexomulti-dimensional-hyperquasiultrameta-being.

    With that, Diggory Berker, Professor of Applied Magic, fainted.


    Diggory Berker woke with a groan. He could feel his hair eddying in the wind and decided that now would not be a good time to open his eyes. The being seemed to notice the man's consciousness, and spoke.

    "Sorry, i took the liberty of taking you while you were knocked out. I'm in a bit of a hurry, see. I have an appointment at three-thirty."
    "Where am I?"
    "It depends on which context you speak of."
    "Where am I sitting on?"
    "What you are sitting on, Mr. Berker, is a magic carpet. My magic carpet."

    Berker's eyes shot open in disbelief, threatened to close themselves again, but his curiosity got the best of him.

    "Are you a..." his voice trailed off.
    "Yes, I am a genie."

    They sat there in silence, Purple giant and pinkish man, for a while.

    "Where's the engine?" He asked, twisting around.
    "Excuse me?"
    "This carpet is violating the 2nd and 3rd laws of thaumodynamics and motion, respectively." He caught the genie's hurt look and hastily added: "Very impressive."
    "Thank you," the genie said with a grin. "I bought it for a bargain."

    More silence. Berker looked for the first time at his surroundings. They seemed to be in a vortex. It was a violent shade of purple, with splotches of yellow and green.

    "So... Where are we going? And why am I here?"
    "I'm here to grant your wish."
    "What wish?"
    "You wanted to know how life began, yes? And so we are going to the moment when life began."
    "Well yeah, but you could've asked me what I really wished for," whined Berker
    "I'm sorry, but I can't make you better with inventing things. You're hopeless."
    "How about a while ago?"
    "A fluke."

    Even more silence.

    "Well, here we are."

    Berker heard a screech as the genie pressed his heel into the front of the carpet, and exited the purple vortex.


    The scenery was best described as bleak. The sky was dark with cumulonimbus clouds striking lightning at a distance. The sea was a disturbing shade of orange, bubbling on the surface, popping now and then, releasing a very salty smell. The land was... nonexistent.

    "Well, I'll be seeing you around," said the genie, demonstrating very poor knowledge of human physiology by suddenly disappearing, and leaving a very shocked Diggory Berker to drown.

    On his way into the abyss and unable to hold his breath anymore, Diggory Berker exhaled his last breath, took a lung full of primordial soup, and thought his last thought before finally expiring, releasing all the microbes in his body to the ocean, as the progenitors of life thereafter.

    And as for his last thought, it was: "Tastes like chicken."

    [1] Thaumaturgy is a fancy way of saying Magic
    [2] It was his wand, really. He has this juvenile amusement at saying: "I have a big stick."
    [3] The Magus is the SI unit for the density of the force of a magical field per cubic cm
      Promote (5)
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse