at how many frames per second does the universe work

[Pah1023]

Tony just believes that since he can't process more than thirty thoughts per second.

[Ad Bot]

[IkeTheGeneric]

Can you prove you can see beyond 30?

Can you prove that there is no difference between 30 and 60 fps? You're arguing against a consensus here so the burden of proof is on you, smart one

Unless you bring me undeniable proof that everything I've learned and have known about processing speed and frame drawing is bullstuff, forget right off with this lot of nonsense

[e-maxx]

and there is a second reason you're not mentioning.

Because since the eyes can barely see past 30 there is no point for them to waste time on 60 frames a second.

compare these two then
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjvBfN6K_P0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX5vI4osR50

[Pastrey Crust]

It's the same. It might as well be 15fps too.

[WaterOre]

The Planck time is the amount of time it takes for something to travel at the speed of light across the smallest distance of the universe, the Planck length. It's about 5.39116 x 10^-44 seconds. Times shorter than this might as well not matter, due to it being impossible to transfer energy in a shorter amount of time.

Assuming that a frame occurs every Planck second, we can determine the framerate of the universe to be 1.855 x 10⁴³ frames per second.

Of course, this is more akin to the tickrate of the universe. The framerate depends entirely on the eye viewing the universe, but is still capped by the universal tickrate, due to the lack of a truly outside observer.

EDIT: Fixed links and elaborated on why times so short are meaningless.

[otto-san]

6.

[Zloff]

https://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

if you can't adjust the settings (turn motion blur off for starters) to the point where you can see a difference between 30 and 60 fps then your eyes just aren't trained enough. it is common knowledge that humans very easily adapt to accommodate their environment and living conditions, so to refuse the idea that eyesight of all things is not exempt from such adaptation is tony-level ignorance

[Doughboy]

0. the universe does not use frames.

[e-maxx]

0. the universe does not use frames.

Then how are the planets hanging in space if they're not framed?

[mod-man]

Then how are the planets hanging in space if they're not framed?

strings? either that or a cosmic bead maze

[Doughboy]

Then how are the planets hanging in space if they're not framed?

thats the work of the puppet-master, dave

[Darth C3P0]

You can see any number of frames, but if its 1000 frames then it will be blurry to the naked human eye

[Space1255]

Then how are the planets hanging in space if they're not framed?

They're not paintings they're sculptures.

[sir dooble]

Then how are the planets hanging in space if they're not framed?

They're glued to the space-time continuum.

[Lord Tony®]

compare these two then
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjvBfN6K_P0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX5vI4osR50

Results are not accurate through a computer screen, you loving know this.

Have to be compared in person.