digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at neatorama.com

25 of the Most Important Questions in the Universe [w/pics]

neatorama.com — People magazine has its 50 Most Beautiful People … Time has a Person of the Year … And mental_floss magazine - besides having tons of fascinating, cool, and juicy stories, anecdotes, and trivia - now has something that trumps ‘em both: The 25 Most Important Questions in the History of the Universe.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • letitbleed62, on 02/19/2008, -3/+3that spoon fork can opener bottle opener is amazing where can i get one
  • MrB398, on 02/19/2008, -1/+14I like cans with peel off lids
  • AtheistRev, on 02/19/2008, -24/+10Where does God live.
    http://www.atheistrevolution.com
    • sockpuppets, on 02/19/2008, -3/+9In a jar of Ragu.
      • revjustin2, on 02/19/2008, -4/+1wow...I thought the url joke was good. This is better.
    • anillop, on 02/19/2008, -2/+10You know I am agnostic and all but is it just me or are the atheists around here getting as annoying and preachy as evangelicals?
      • LucasVB, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Nothing can be as preachy as evangelicals.
  • Vazelos, on 02/19/2008, -10/+3I was expecting the more common one: 'The chicken did the egg, or the egg did the chicken first?'
    • nepawoods, on 02/19/2008, -5/+15Do you mean eggs in general, or chicken eggs, and if the latter, do you define a "chicken egg" to be an egg laid by a chicken, or an egg containing a developing chicken?
      • d3lta, on 02/19/2008, -12/+3Please go out and get some sunshine and fresh air
    • scout29c, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2The chicken came first. It was a mutation and unique species, “Gallus domesticus”. What species of Gallus it was before that, I don’t know.
      • MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3If we're talking about chicken eggs, I'd say the egg came first. The first organism we can classify as a modern chicken was once in an egg of its own, the first "chicken egg". The hen that laid it technically wouldn't have been a chicken, so the egg came first. Of course, this would mean that there in fact was a single prototypical "first chicken", which isn't really the case anyway.
        • nepawoods, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Since the eggs we eat contain no chickens, yet we still call them chicken eggs, I'd say a chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken, thus the first chicken egg was preceded by the first chicken.
      • uzusan, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5The chicken that was the first of the species Gallus Domesticus would have to have been born from an egg. However the chicken that laid that egg would not have been of the same species.
        So it would be something like this:
        Chicken-like animal (NOT Gallus Domesticus species, though very closely related) gives birth.
        Egg Laid (Mutation occurs while egg is being formed, giving rise to first embryo of new species Gallus Domesticus)
        Egg hatches (First member of new species Gallus Domesticus is born).

        you could go back through all the species of chicken until you find a point where the animal that gave birth to the first animal that is recognizably a chicken and say it was the point where the chicken was first born, rather than at the birth of the Gallus Domesticus species specifically, but its still the same result.
    • allywilson, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2What came first The Chicken or The Egg? Answer: The Chicken.

      Why? Well, (oh god if some creationist replies I'll shoot myself), remember Evolution? If you go far enough back (Chicken to Reptile, Reptile to Amphibian, Amphibian to cellular structures, etc - all the whilst laying eggs) you get to the original organism. Not an egg.
      • Firehed, on 02/19/2008, -2/+6Ah, but the genetic mutations from the two not-quite-chickens took place in the egg.
        • nepawoods, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Actually, mutations can occur in any cell in an organism, and a mutation in a germ cell (i.e. a cell that undergoes meiosis to become two sperm cells, or two egg cells) may be passed on to offspring. It need not occur in the egg.
    • quiznos, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2No, the chicken did not come first. All birds lay eggs (shared trait), meaning they must all have a common ancestor who laid eggs. So from a biological standpoint, the egg came first.
  • Del129, on 02/19/2008, -9/+89the answer is 42.
    • Slovenian6474, on 02/19/2008, -1/+44There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.

      -D. Adams
    • macweirdo42, on 02/19/2008, -10/+12What do you get if you multiply six by nine?
      • knowsfear, on 02/19/2008, -11/+754, now how is that relevant?
      • Gerbil_Juice, on 02/19/2008, -1/+13It is relevant if you've actually read the book.

        Hint: Scrabble
      • pharekyz, on 02/19/2008, -0/+14From Wikipedia:

        At the end of the first radio series (and television series, and The Restaurant at the End of the Universe book) Arthur Dent having escaped the Earth's destruction potentially has some of the computational matrix in his brain, attempts to discover The Ultimate Question by extracting it from his brainwave patterns, as abusively[6] suggested by Marvin the Paranoid Android, when a Scrabble-playing caveman spells out FORTY TWO. Arthur pulls random letters from a bag, but only gets the sentence "WHAT DO YOU GET IF YOU MULTIPLY SIX BY NINE?"
        "Six by nine. Forty two."
        "That's it. That's all there is."
        "I always thought something was fundamentally wrong with the universe"

        Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Answer_to_Life,_t ...
        • macweirdo42, on 02/19/2008, -0/+7Bizarre - I get dugg down for making the reference, and yet you get dugg up for explaining it.
    • Webler707, on 02/19/2008, -1/+12How many roads must a man walk down?
    • girlpirate, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5I want to Digg you up but you're at +42 and that would be wrong.
    • insanebrain, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4When I clicked the RSS-link I knew somebody would say '42'. .. thanx for proving me right !
    • JusticeFriend, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1RIP Douglas, we miss you!
  • dildoolielly, on 02/19/2008, -19/+8Did Jesus really exist?
    • Gabberwok, on 02/19/2008, -8/+4Probably, but I don't care.
    • tacroy, on 02/19/2008, -8/+12Pretty much every historian believes that Jesus existed. If you have some references that think otherwise, let me know, i'd love to read them.
      The real question is do any of Jesus's claims hold any water.
      • revjustin2, on 02/19/2008, -2/+6I think the real real question is did any of Jesus' claims walk on water.
        • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1No, I would say evidence of the Guy's existence would be more relevant

          I mean, Santa Claus' has flying reindeer too, so whats your point?
      • Wartyboskfapped, on 02/19/2008, -10/+5Wrong. Many historians have questioned the historical existence of Jesus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Albert_Wells http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis
        • tacroy, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2Hey, thanks for the links. I'll look more into those. However, just reading your second link showed this.
          "It has recently been popularized by a number of authors including Earl Doherty and Robert M. Price. However, modern scholarly discussion and support is very limited.[2][3]"
          And also
          "The idea of Jesus as a myth is rejected by the majority of biblical scholars and historians."

          Both are from the link you provided.
          • Iconoclast314, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Read what they have to say and decide for yourself.
      • Iconoclast314, on 02/19/2008, -7/+1The Jesus Puzzle, by Earl Doherty, argues for a mythical Jesus. You can find more here:

        http://www.jesuspuzzle.com/
        • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1Oh no! Scary facts threatening the existence of my imaginary friend! I better digg you down.

          Careful, if you try confusing them with facts they'll get angry. And then you really could expect the Spanish Inquisition.
      • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -0/+2------------"Pretty much every historian believes that Jesus existed."--------------------

        Ask ANY local university historian for the evidence indicating jesus was anything other than a manufactured martyr of the late 1st century CE.

        He/she will tell you that no such evidence of a "historical" jesus exists. His existence MUST be taken on faith, just like those who believe in Zeus and/or many other mythical characters.

        Christians love to bring up the names of Josephus Flavius, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, Suetonius and others as testimonies to Jesus’ life, however, they couldn't have been eye-witnesses to him simply because they didn't live in his calculated supposed lifetime.

        How about historians who ~did~ live in that time? “Take, for example, the works of Philo Judaeus who's birth occurred in 20 B.C.E. and died 50 C.E. He lived as the greatest Jewish-Hellenistic philosopher and historian of the time and lived in the area of Jerusalem during the alleged life of Jesus.

        He wrote detailed accounts of the Jewish events that occurred in the surrounding area. Yet not once, in all of his volumes of writings, do we read a single account of a Jesus "the Christ." Nor do we find any mention of Jesus in Seneca's (4? B.C.E. - 65 C.E.) writings, nor from the historian Pliny the Elder (23? - 79 C.E.).

        If, indeed, such a well-known Jesus existed, as the gospels allege, does any reader here think it reasonable that, at the very least, the fame of Jesus would not have reached the ears of one of these men?

        Amazingly, we have not one Jewish, Greek, or Roman writer, even those who lived in the Middle East, much less anywhere else on the earth, who ever mentions him during his supposed life time. This appears quite extraordinary, and you will find few Christian apologists who dare mention this embarrassing fact.
    • HenvY, on 02/19/2008, -11/+9He existed alright, but he was just a man.
    • NecroSexy, on 02/19/2008, -12/+5Of course not.
    • scout29c, on 02/19/2008, -11/+3Yes, the person we refer to as Jesus really did exits at about the time people say. And yes, he was the Son of God − but then, we are all sons and daughters of God. We are God. That was his message − which many lose track of because they are too, too wrapped up in icons.
      • SonnyW, on 02/19/2008, -5/+6Then I guess we all have a terrible father.
      • FlyingSpaghetti, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2It sounds like you have too many shortcuts on your desktop.
      • darkcooger, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5I am pretty sure that Jesus's message was not that we are God. Did you pull that out of the Gospel of St. Thomas or something?
        • SteveMax, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1His message was something like:
          "We are all brothers, we should treat each other as brothers; God is our father, he created us. I'm God's son; you are God's son; the romans are God's sons. We are all equal".
          This was distorted some centuries later to "I'm the son of God, you are all equal if you believe me and bad people if you don't".
          Personally, I find the notion of an enlightened human coming up with a good philosophy much more plausible, and much more appealing, than the notion of a special creature coming up with it.
          • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1Why don't you present what you feel is the best piece of evidence for the biblical jesus? Actually, one of the main reasons I denounced my Christian faith is because of quite the opposite, I can't find one single shred of evidence for the jesus of the bible. Not one artifact or eyewitness account. Not even in the Bible

            Can you help?
          • SteveMax, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1I'm not Christian, so I can't help with that. Christianity turned a nice message into an oppressive "faith", just like the Islam did with Mohammad's message, and so on. Organized religions suck.
            However, you can get something good from each and every one of those; it can help you define your morality. Just don't follow anything blindly.
          • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1---------------"you can get something good from each and every one of those; it can help you define your morality"----------------

            You can also get "something good" from a box of cracker jacks or a fortune cookie, however we are not spending billions of tax payer dollars on cracker jacks or fortune cookies, now are we?!

            Why are you getting away from the point?
          • SteveMax, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1Yes, once again, organized religions suck. You don't need them to get the core ideas of the main philosophers (Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, etc).
            By the way, the constitution here says that the State is lay; or, the government cannot have any ties with any religion. We here don't spend tax dollars on any cracker jack, fortune cookie or organized religion. I know that unfortunately other countries don't respect this.
            I'm just giving you my opinion as a non-religious person. I'm not "getting away from the point". I really don't care if Jesus actually existed or not; but he (or whatever gave birth to his myth) left a nice message. Don't overanalyze any religious texts, don't follow any priests, just read the texts. Some of those contain some undeniable wisdom (and some of it is pure crap, of course), much more than most fortune cookies. Even the Jewish-Christian bible has some good parts, hidden among the "God built the world in seven days" *****.
    • SuperWinner, on 02/19/2008, -7/+4I seriously doubt it, only because the religious people have lied to us about everything else, why not that too?
    • Bizarrkley, on 02/19/2008, -3/+4Yeah, I just saw Jesus down at the taco truck on 4th Street. His brother Juan and sister Imelda make a mean burrito!
      • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Actually, the rumor going around Washington is, …the Jesus who's been advising Bush and told him there would be no US casualties in Iraq is actually Jesus Guittierez, 38, an employee of Taco Bell down the street from the White House. Our Leader got confused by his name tag and has been directing foreign policy based on his advice ever since..

        ...More to follow.
    • dildoolielly, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1WOW! 32 digg downs, 22 coments and STILL not ONE shred of evidence.

      And "The Scholars agree there was a Jesus", is NOT evidence. "The" Scholars, huh? lol

      I challenge ANY CHRISTIAN to provide ANY evidence to the existance of the "Jesus Christ". No more debates filled with fancy symantics or "He said she said" *****, just back up your statements with actual scientific evidence. Something that would hold up in a court of law.

      So far the Jesus story seems to be a chocolate covered turd

  • banido, on 02/19/2008, -1/+21Anyone else tried to tickle themselves ?
    • Mootabolife, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1It works here. But no one else can tickle me...
    • FlyingSpaghetti, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Please do not tickle your pickle.
    • themoose, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I can :s

      Is there something wrong with me?
    • OaklandNative, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I always thought most people can tickle the roof of their mouth with their tongue or finger. No? I know I can.
    • elhaf, on 04/08/2008, -0/+1Try the back of your upper arm.
  • Shiftgood, on 02/19/2008, -7/+2Why?
  • d3lta, on 02/19/2008, -5/+18"Wait, wait I got one; Why didn't I get my period?"
  • Gabberwok, on 02/19/2008, -1/+67In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea...
    • Webler707, on 02/19/2008, -0/+9Two Douglas Adams quotes already, I am loving it.
      "This is obviously some strange usage of the word safe that I was not previously aware of."
    • trg100, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Haha! Made me go find my copy :)

      (For reference: "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.")
      • Gabberwok, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Sorry, might have screwed up the text a bit... still, the general sense of it is fantastic. :)
  • roseman5285, on 02/19/2008, -2/+5ah, good ol' Ticonderoga pencils, the erasers on those things were far superior to anything else, none of that pink smudging
  • moxillaq, on 02/19/2008, -4/+3#5 "Which Came First, the Can Opener or the Can?" sounds obvious but the explanation is hilarious.
  • Alphateam, on 02/19/2008, -1/+46Dugg for being on one page.
  • thebrawl, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3That nougat looks delicious
  • macweirdo42, on 02/19/2008, -1/+5Who is this God person, anyway?
    • cJw314, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3Atheism is so last century.
      • macweirdo42, on 02/19/2008, -3/+1I could just as easily believe in God, but just simply think that He's a total wanker.
    • sharkd, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Well That About Wraps It Up for God
    • nekochan, on 02/19/2008, -0/+6gentlemen, we have our 3rd Douglas Adams quote.
  • eliezersilver, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2226. Why does mental floss not have a better server?
  • jamesmacq, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3Site's down
  • theMcPatriot, on 02/19/2008, -27/+3Mirror: http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:http://www.nea ...
  • 2much2handleBK, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2Mirror?
  • theMcPatriot, on 02/19/2008, -1/+10http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:http://www.nea ...
    • faraggi, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1wy would you link the TEXT-ONLY mirror on a post that clearly bases its success on the pics!?
  • AmadelaJake, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Google cache: http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:gXRm-XiccL4J: ...
  • theMcPatriot, on 02/19/2008, -2/+7This one should work: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:http://www.ne ...
    • theMcPatriot, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1This one is text only, the others seem to be getting hung up on waiting for images from neatorama.
  • Afronick, on 02/19/2008, -7/+1Mirror: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:gXRm-XiccL4J: ...
  • gamedemon, on 02/19/2008, -7/+1Mirror:http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:http://www.nea ...
  • timbob, on 02/19/2008, -3/+4http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:gXRm-XiccL4J: ...
  • codered1322, on 02/19/2008, -4/+526. How can I get laid more?
  • weeeezzll, on 02/19/2008, -6/+1500 Internal Server Error
    Apache/2.8

    Clearly the questions were not THAT important!
  • scoottie, on 02/19/2008, -4/+1internal server error > universe
  • Vindicoth, on 02/19/2008, -7/+1http://www.duggmirror.com
    newp..fail.
  • bigtizzle, on 02/19/2008, -0/+6I can't believe I finally know the answer to the snooze button question. I've wanted to know why nine minutes since I was a kid.
    • girlpirate, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1me too. now i need to know why the snooze on the Nintendo DS is only 6 minutes. six pathetic minutes does not a snooze make.
  • StacyWebb, on 02/19/2008, -1/+5No. 27 - How to handle the Digg Effect
  • ray42, on 02/19/2008, -5/+3Will it blend?
  • shakbhaji, on 02/19/2008, -3/+1"How Much Wood Would a Woodchuck Chuck if a Woodchuck Could Chuck Wood?"
    Seventeen.
    • themoose, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1As much wood as a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
    • Gizza, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1 Guybrush: How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
      Carpenter: A woodchuck would chuck no amount of wood since a woodchuck can't chuck wood.
      Guybrush: But if a woodchuck could chuck and would chuck some amount of wood, what amount of wood would a woodchuck chuck?
      Carpenter: Even if a woodchuck could chuck wood and even if a woodchuck would chuck wood, should a woodchuck chuck wood?
      Guybrush: A woodchuck should chuck wood if a woodchuck could chuck wood, as long as a woodchuck would chuck wood.
      Carpenter: Oh shut up.
    • shakbhaji, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Apparently no one watches south park.
      • JusticeFriend, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Apparently no one thinks that wood ***** its funny
  • bjs3171, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2#26. Why don't we use spell check?
  • Nougat, on 02/19/2008, -5/+2"3. Where Does Nougat Come From?"

    Really? I thought *I* was "true Nougat."
  • bob3, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7But, can it play Crysis?
    • ElAssoWipo, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Hahaha, having recently built a brand new PC, I can also agree that right now, that is an extremely important question.
      • Godlike, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2I'm just ganna wait like a year and buy that one you just build at like half the price, and then play Crysis :P
    • theberlindoctor, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Will Crysis blend?
  • dlm85, on 02/19/2008, -5/+2#27. Spit or swallow?
    • theworldisflat, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2It's obvious that your mother did neither, shame.
  • jspania, on 02/19/2008, -1/+0http://www.worldrps.com?
  • emptyinside, on 02/19/2008, -1/+9The ultimate question of the universe:

    Why doesn't digg automatically mirror content which goes to the front page, thus being a good net citizen and not taxing servers which obviously can't handle the load?

    I guess Kevin Rose is too busy pondering the depths of sobriety to do anything to improve the beast that is digg...
    • strad2, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Um, because then you are denying the source site the traffic, which it may want?
  • vblvbl, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3For the record, the chicken egg came first.
  • mbh3, on 02/19/2008, -5/+1a COMPLETE waste of time
  • tradwolley, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Can the server handle the load?
  • offspring06, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4"20. Can You Actually Sense Weather with an Injured body Part?"

    This is true. I hurt my knee a couple of years ago and whenever a storm is approaching my knee hurts. The bigger the storm the more it hurts.
    • jimmick, on 02/20/2008, -0/+2So your knee would explode in space. Oh wait, it would, SWEET
  • 31073, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Elwood Edwards, that'll win some trivia money.
  • PerroLoco, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4Dude, where's my car?
  • spineaches, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1THESE AREN'T IMPORTANT THINGS AT ALL!!!!!!
    • Godlike, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2GEESE AREN'T IMPORTANT THINGS AT ALL!!!!!
      • perfectlyfrank, on 02/19/2008, -0/+0I can't tell if that's hilarious or awful... either way, :)
      • spineaches, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1just because you think you are godlike does not mean geese are unimportant.
        • Godlike, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1bust because you think you are godlike does not mean geese are unimportant.
  • oblivionatm, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1"Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it require. You damned men, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom - while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good? - by what standard?" - John Galt
  • yujie, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Will it blend like a blackhole?
  • dorkino, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Dugg for #2 - http://www.makinwavs.com Get the AOL "You've Got Mail" guy to record any phrase you want.
    • themoose, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I wonder if he'll do "You've got herpes".
      • Godlike, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Yeah, you can google that one I think.
  • fatlip, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3inaccurate. "where are my pants" is not listed
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.