Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sobiyela t1_j6i21zp wrote

Nah. Things deteriorate.

Given enough time it will be desintegrated by "random" events.

Example, I lost something in a volcano but the very volcano erupted and my thing was destroyed. After some billion years earth is eaten by the sun and the remaining molecules of the thing will be torn apart by it. The atoms that remain after that can even survive untill the black hole era but then they will converted to energy and swallowed by several black holes. Your thing stoped being that thing by the volcano event, you can't find it after that nor it's remains. If you think you still think you can, well then no one will survive the other events so your thing (what remains of it) isn't findable anymore because there is no one to find it. QED

8

Alfiy_wolf OP t1_j6iyrbn wrote

Then it’s not lost it’s destroyed

3

sobiyela t1_j6jbawt wrote

It was lost and remained lost until it was destroyed. Conclusion, it was never found nor it can be found.

1

Alfiy_wolf OP t1_j6jfcmo wrote

It could have been found before it was destroyed

0

Awesomethecool t1_j6jszu6 wrote

>could of

Please never say that again ever.

1

Alfiy_wolf OP t1_j6ju4yp wrote

I could of said could have butt I had rather of said of

So I could of

1

Awesomethecool t1_j6jvuu3 wrote

It's not correct, it has never been correct, it will never be correct, and it is not even CLOSE to the correct way of using those words. How the fuck do so many people use 'of' instead of 'have'?

The worst part is that 90% of the time it's Americans making the mistake, whose native language is ENGLISH

Sorry to be a grammar nazi but it's literally the most nonsensical grammar issue of all time.

1

out2seeagain t1_j6m9ee9 wrote

Nah, you’re wrong and no matter which clever way you try to spin it, you’re still wrong.

1

Alfiy_wolf OP t1_j6mb77c wrote

If it’s lost it can be found, matter can not be destroyed or created

1