<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Online Marketing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.omgenius.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.omgenius.com</link>
	<description>I'm Online Marketing Genius With No Knowledge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 05:53:26 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Google Spelling Fail by Danish</title>
		<link>http://www.omgenius.com/google-spelling-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-12920</link>
		<dc:creator>Danish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 05:53:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.omgenius.com/?p=20#comment-12920</guid>
		<description>hey check out one more interesting google collection....
http://mashable.com/2009/08/11/funniest-google-suggest-results/
dis one is awesome tooo
ha ha ha ha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hey check out one more interesting google collection&#8230;.<br />
<a href="http://mashable.com/2009/08/11/funniest-google-suggest-results/" rel="nofollow">http://mashable.com/2009/08/11/funniest-google-suggest-results/</a><br />
dis one is awesome tooo<br />
ha ha ha ha</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Google Spelling Fail by hemanth.hm</title>
		<link>http://www.omgenius.com/google-spelling-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-12653</link>
		<dc:creator>hemanth.hm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.omgenius.com/?p=20#comment-12653</guid>
		<description>Similar Collection of Google is .....: http://digg.com/d310Q4c?t</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Similar Collection of Google is &#8230;..: <a href="http://digg.com/d310Q4c?t" rel="nofollow">http://digg.com/d310Q4c?t</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Time Travel Can&#8217;t Exist by Jeo</title>
		<link>http://www.omgenius.com/why-time-travel-cant-exist/comment-page-1/#comment-8499</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:58:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.omgenius.com/?p=35#comment-8499</guid>
		<description>Relativity is based on the principle that you can define a four-dimensional point in spacetime, so conceptually you could move from one point in this 4-d continuum to another. And quantum physics has the many-worlds interpretation, in which every quantum event splits the universe into multiple timelines. 

But even without multiple timelines, time travel could still exist. Some physicist proved how it would work, I forget his name but here&#039;s what he said....the following is a thought experiment but he said the same principle applies in any situation.

Suppose you have pool table. There&#039;s a wormhole on it. Roll a ball into the wormhole, and it will curve around and come out three seconds in the past.

Aim the ball right, and it will come out and knock itself off its path, so it never enters the wormhole in the first place. Paradox! If it never enters the wormhole, it can&#039;t knock itself off the path, so it does enter the wormhole, so it does knock itself away....

What actually happens, he said, is that the ball comes out of the wormhole on a slightly altered trajectory, so that instead of striking its earlier self a solid blow, it strikes it only a glancing blow, allowing it to enter the wormhole.

And why does it come out with this altered path, despite your careful aim? Because it was hit a glancing blow...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Relativity is based on the principle that you can define a four-dimensional point in spacetime, so conceptually you could move from one point in this 4-d continuum to another. And quantum physics has the many-worlds interpretation, in which every quantum event splits the universe into multiple timelines. </p>
<p>But even without multiple timelines, time travel could still exist. Some physicist proved how it would work, I forget his name but here&#8217;s what he said&#8230;.the following is a thought experiment but he said the same principle applies in any situation.</p>
<p>Suppose you have pool table. There&#8217;s a wormhole on it. Roll a ball into the wormhole, and it will curve around and come out three seconds in the past.</p>
<p>Aim the ball right, and it will come out and knock itself off its path, so it never enters the wormhole in the first place. Paradox! If it never enters the wormhole, it can&#8217;t knock itself off the path, so it does enter the wormhole, so it does knock itself away&#8230;.</p>
<p>What actually happens, he said, is that the ball comes out of the wormhole on a slightly altered trajectory, so that instead of striking its earlier self a solid blow, it strikes it only a glancing blow, allowing it to enter the wormhole.</p>
<p>And why does it come out with this altered path, despite your careful aim? Because it was hit a glancing blow&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Time Travel Can&#8217;t Exist by Alex</title>
		<link>http://www.omgenius.com/why-time-travel-cant-exist/comment-page-1/#comment-8495</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:04:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.omgenius.com/?p=35#comment-8495</guid>
		<description>Not exactly. Time is a dimension, but the common perception of the fourth dimension is off. If you were to view an object in the fourth dimension they would see a long undulating snake of the object at every point of time it has existed, in every state. For example, a human would bee seen starting as an embryo, then the snake of every point of its existence, then it when it dies (or decayed, depending on when you stop it). The fifth dimension would then be any point where that time line, so to speak, diverges, just as the switch from the first dimension to the second is having two lines intersecting. Consequently, the sixth dimension is then the entire time line that exists because of that divergence.

To put it simply: in purely theoretical terms, different time lines do exist. They have no bearing on each other, and are more or less irrelevant to you. It is not possible to travel between them, which is why they don&#039;t matter, but they do exist, in theory.

I may not have explained this perfectly, if you&#039;re bored there is video that explains it better with visual aids. Look up &quot;How to Imagine the Tenth Dimension&quot; on youtube.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not exactly. Time is a dimension, but the common perception of the fourth dimension is off. If you were to view an object in the fourth dimension they would see a long undulating snake of the object at every point of time it has existed, in every state. For example, a human would bee seen starting as an embryo, then the snake of every point of its existence, then it when it dies (or decayed, depending on when you stop it). The fifth dimension would then be any point where that time line, so to speak, diverges, just as the switch from the first dimension to the second is having two lines intersecting. Consequently, the sixth dimension is then the entire time line that exists because of that divergence.</p>
<p>To put it simply: in purely theoretical terms, different time lines do exist. They have no bearing on each other, and are more or less irrelevant to you. It is not possible to travel between them, which is why they don&#8217;t matter, but they do exist, in theory.</p>
<p>I may not have explained this perfectly, if you&#8217;re bored there is video that explains it better with visual aids. Look up &#8220;How to Imagine the Tenth Dimension&#8221; on youtube.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on eBay &#8211; Major Fail by Sev</title>
		<link>http://www.omgenius.com/ebay-major-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-7932</link>
		<dc:creator>Sev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 16:27:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.omgenius.com/?p=16#comment-7932</guid>
		<description>this is more like a epic win if you can buy ebay on ebay</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this is more like a epic win if you can buy ebay on ebay</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Windows Destroys Linux and Mac (Security) by SchoolYou</title>
		<link>http://www.omgenius.com/windows-destroys-linux-and-mac-security/comment-page-1/#comment-7826</link>
		<dc:creator>SchoolYou</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 11:31:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.omgenius.com/?p=33#comment-7826</guid>
		<description>Disclosure does not equal exploit. All Linux vulnerabilities will be documented whereas Windows and Apple have to act to disclose theirs. That&#039;s the difference between open source and proprietary.

Try looking at how many of these vulnerabilities were exploited or exploitable and what the length of patch cycle was. Then you&#039;d have some data.

Oh, and one more word: Cornficker.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Disclosure does not equal exploit. All Linux vulnerabilities will be documented whereas Windows and Apple have to act to disclose theirs. That&#8217;s the difference between open source and proprietary.</p>
<p>Try looking at how many of these vulnerabilities were exploited or exploitable and what the length of patch cycle was. Then you&#8217;d have some data.</p>
<p>Oh, and one more word: Cornficker.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.316 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2010-02-20 09:41:46 -->
