Timeline for What could an indestructible person contribute to the world's technology?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 4, 2015 at 3:14 | vote | accept | Swindles | ||
| May 29, 2015 at 8:58 | comment | added | Swindles | @DanSmolinske No, he can eat and breath but he doesn't require them. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 13:39 | comment | added | DaaaahWhoosh | I imagine he could make some money letting people shoot him. It'd be a great way to blow off steam. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 13:22 | comment | added | Dan Smolinske | Does he need to eat or breath? | |
| May 28, 2015 at 11:44 | answer | added | Blake Walsh | timeline score: 5 | |
| May 28, 2015 at 11:07 | answer | added | Abhishek | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 28, 2015 at 10:25 | comment | added | Neil | So you have an indestructible man, and you're telling me that the indestructible man himself wouldn't be the most interesting contribution to science? I think if there is anything he could contribute, it would be to be directly studied. He seems to defy the laws of physics. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 9:45 | comment | added | Swindles | @Neil He is indestructible physically both internally and externally. He cannot hurt himself. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 8:50 | answer | added | SJuan76 | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 28, 2015 at 8:37 | comment | added | Neil | @Swindles Being indestructable says nothing about how he would hold up from a large fall. They say a helmet only helps somewhat in a collision because the brain, being loose in your skull, is slammed against the skull, and despite not takign external damage from a fall, that doesn't mean there wouldn't be internal damage. A corollary to this: can he hurt himself in any way? | |
| May 28, 2015 at 8:32 | history | edited | Swindles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added detail to a possible answer
|
| May 28, 2015 at 8:29 | comment | added | Swindles | @archmagus Haha. I wanted to upvote that but i don't have the ability yet. The thing is, a single average man would hardly produce the required time to create an interplanetary base. Maybe by the time he is halfway finishing it, our technology is already able to build one faster and cheaper. If you think this is not the case, provide your reply as an answer with an elaboration | |
| May 28, 2015 at 8:25 | comment | added | Swindles | @user6760 He cries, excretes, etc.. but on the moment they are no longer part of him, they lose their indestructibility. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 8:14 | comment | added | user6760 | does he shed skins? | |
| May 28, 2015 at 7:51 | comment | added | amziraro | Hand him a few nukes, bolt him to the bottom of an Orion style nuclear pulse rocket and send him to Mars/Europa/Titan to build a base. :D | |
| May 28, 2015 at 7:51 | comment | added | Swindles | @Bookeater I think you can add that as an answer as long as you specify what he contributes and how he contributes. Maybe on the occasion, it might be better for a trained astronaut to do the mars and titan mission than the indestructible guy(where he is better off on something else because he can explicitly clean the nuclear waste). | |
| May 28, 2015 at 7:44 | comment | added | Swindles | @Abhishek I don't know how to put it in detail but yes I want him to be inert but in such a way that I don't want his inertness to be put against him, i.e; "How can he survive if he is fully inert?" His data is unstable that he is inert enough to live and inert enough to be indestructible. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 6:50 | comment | added | Bookeater | @swindles so this is gonna be a race between the centre of the earth, Mars & Titan and the original proper housecleaning then. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 6:49 | comment | added | Abhishek | @swindles is he inert to all sorts of chemicals and radiation or just the ones which cause harm to him? | |
| May 28, 2015 at 6:44 | comment | added | Swindles | @Bookeater Good one. One of the things I'm thinking is that maybe he can be sent to the sun and harvest something in there. This act is part of my definition on contributing to science, not solely the intellectual research. The wittiest answer wins. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 6:41 | comment | added | Bookeater | Seems to me that contributing to science is a function of the mind, not the body. I'd sooner ask this person to clean up stuff at Chernobyl link and Fukushima link. | |
| May 28, 2015 at 6:28 | history | asked | Swindles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |