...
One of us has erred here...360^o is a complete circle, so rotating through that size angle would bring you back to where you started from. Or have I missed some clever subtlety here?
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 16:53, 1 reply, 16 years ago)

It's a very old trolling technique.
I'm meant to bang on and on about how I am a doctor in mathmatics and president of NASA's geometry division as you get more and more wound up. I'm going home in 5 though, so I give up.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 16:56, Reply)

Ah, with you now.
Sorry, it's been quite a long day and I thought I was actually losing my mind for a moment.
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 16:57, Reply)

Of course you were assuming that they were facing the X-box to start with

(Cave Duck, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:04, Reply)

And even if they were. They could turn "full circle" and then walk away backwards.

(Cave Duck, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:06, Reply)

Or they could walk in a different direction
if they and the Xbox were on a non-Euclidean surface.
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:07, Reply)

Is there any way to shoehorn spin 1/2 particles in here?
Not that it'd help at a macro level obviously, but still ...
(BrianHequator was stretching owls, on, or around, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:12, Reply)

I guess you'd need electrons to power the Xbox in the first place
I think they're half-integer spin...
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:14, Reply)

I do
But in any case, they'd carry on walking in the same direction, after executing a largely pointless rotation through a complete circle.
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:06, Reply)

Ahem
img168.imageshack.us/i/1204667780558ht9.gif/
(Himjim died a little more inside on, Mon 27 Sep 2010, 17:35, Reply)