A planet so large

That time runs backwards.

Is it possible?

No. Although if you wanted to make time WALK backwards, that would work. Running backwards is dangerous.

it wouldn't matter how large a planet is, it's still moving quite fast. If you take a pencil, and hold it at one end and rotate it around, do you notice that the other end moves much faster with just a flick of your wrist. There is much more velocity at the end than at the center. The difference is that at the center of our planet, it needs to be moving much faster as it is liquid and then cools as it approaches atmosphere. The rotation of the earth itself is propelled through friction which is why we have a molten core. The larger the planet, the faster the molten core would have to be rotating to keep it from breaking apart. The reason it is different in space from here on earth when moving things in centrifuge has to do with atmosphere vs vacuum. Liquids breaks apart in atmosphere because of resistance during centrifuge.

So, your large planet travel backwards wouldn't actually be going backwards, it would only appear so by relativity.

:/

>>3
wat

>>4
Don't pay attention to him.

>>1
If you think about the suggestion long enough you should realize it makes no sense.  The size of a planet will not, for example, have any effect on the normal order of chemical process in a reaction, e.g., where there should the natural formation of carbon dioxide from free carbon and oxygen molecules there is, instead, for no sufficiently good reason, a natural decomposition of carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen molecules.

>>5
he's not talking about microcosms, he's talking about macrocosms and time...what are you on about...carbon-dating?

:/

>>5
I heard a theory that gravity could bend time

>>7
The theory mentioned is a major assertion of Einstein's theory of relativity - that gravity affects spacetime.  The theory only covers for time slowing down and for light being pulled by gravity (at its extreme being unable to escape from a gravity well once caught); it never asserts anything about time reversing.

The problem with the "planet so large" postulate is that gravity is affected in some way by both mass and volume.  A black hole, for instance, is considered to have one of the strongest gravity pulls for its size because all of the mass of its former star has been condensed into a minute region.  "Time" at this singularity is said to have stopped, though that can only be mathematically proven.  For a body of large size to have time stopped on it due to infinite spacetime curves, it would have had to have collapsed from another body of such size that it would dwarf even our concepts of the size of star systems.  There is also the possibility that the substance of the planetoid is incredibly dense; size is not as much of an issue at that point, though

>>7-8
Both of you are idiots. Thanks for reminding me why I stopped reading /sci/.

>>9
What are you doing here then?

>>9
read
>>10

2nd'd.
y u here still reading...either you ARE still reading and lying or you didn't stop reading /sci/ in which case you are still lying.

Tell us the of your multiple-realities.

:/

>>8
the planetoid  could be made of dark matter

>>12
Or maybe it could be made out of anti-dark matter!!! O.O'

Ok can time be distorted by gravity or slowed down?

>>14
Of course, relativity. It appears to be slow, but it is only an optical illusion. The issue with "planet so large" is that if you were on said planet, time would be flowing as equally as here on earth. The difference would be, "what is used to distinguish relativity?"
For us, it is our trek in revolving around the sun. One cycle = 24 hours = 1 day.

With "Planet So Large" you'd have to find your contrast in order to distinguish your length of time. But for a human on "Planet So Large" were said conditions favorable for human existence, time would be equilateral to human perception regardless of planetary size...but looking out into space from "Planet So Large" may appear to be constantly in motion where here on Earth we have problems distinguishing motion from looking at the stars...though over time, it is traceable.

Relatively speaking. "Planet So Large" while interesting in fictional propagation has its limitations in pragmatic science especially when "Planet So Large" are extremely rare in possibility if even at all existent in natural occurrence.

:/

>>15  <---This guy right here...He digs Uranus...

>>4,15
☣ Please try to ignore troll posts! ☣

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/77139

Size is not neccessarily a factor, what matters is mass.

>>18
matter...mass...lol. :P

:/

>>16
Only when excavating for lost treasures.

:/

>>18
Size is proportional to mass

>>21
lol, wut?

:/

>>21
No. Density will vary, density is mass per unit volume.

>>23
precisely...wait, how is density relevant?

:/

>>24
Consider black holes: extremely dense, and can be very tiny. So they are 'massive', that is why their gravitational pull is so strong.

>>25
☣ Please try to ignore troll posts! ☣

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/77139

>>25
Black holes?...you mean like [b]NIGGER ANUSES?[b]

>>27
^* African American anuses

>>28
gotta lick em all!

>>29
NO THANK YOU Are you an queer!

>>30
Only as much as you deny it of yourself.

>>31
I deny nothing! I can insure you that I am no queer!

>>32
You don't deny you're an queer?

o.O'...XD PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

:/

>>33
What! You are taking what I said out of context!

>>34
You are inferring something different from what I had previously stated. Lrn2reading comprehension.

"Only as much [queer] as you deny it [being queer] of yourself."

"I deny nothing!" is an expression of denial. You deny nothing, then go to deny you are an queer. Which is it? Do you deny nothing or do you deny you are an queer? Only one can be true logically. And logically, which ever you choose condemns you to being an queer cause that is how you get people to tell the truth.

:/

>>35
"I can insure you that I am no queer!"

>>36
Your denial of queerdom is queer.

:/

>>37
NO THANK YOU

>>38
SO you deny the denial of queerdom?

:/

>>39
I am no queer!