10 = 2
Ooops... I like your nonsensical explanation better than my nonsensical explanation anyway.
-Albatross
-Albatross
| Duoas wrote: |
|---|
| You are confusing measurement with actuality. |
No, I don't.
| Duoas wrote: |
|---|
| A circle is a finite thing, but it has neither start nor end. |
It depends on how you define a circle. In topology, a circle, like every curve, is a continuous mapping from an interval of real numbers to a topological space. The images of the start and the end of that interval are considered the start and the end of the circle, respectively -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curve#Topology
Small problem: a search within that Wikipedia article for the terms "start point", "end point" and "circle" returned nothing, and searching for "point" within the Topology section of the Wikipedia article returned nothing in regards to when a Jordan curve was defined to start and defined to end without possibility of changing that point and retaining the shape of that curve.
To me, the selected start and end points are merely for simplicity, but an infinite number of them are possible, so one cannot be chosen in a circle just like that without more information or reason.
-Albatross
To me, the selected start and end points are merely for simplicity, but an infinite number of them are possible, so one cannot be chosen in a circle just like that without more information or reason.
-Albatross
Last edited on
| Albatross wrote: |
|---|
| a search within that Wikipedia article for the terms "start point", "end point" and "circle" returned nothing, and searching for "point" within the Topology section of the Wikipedia article returned nothing in regards to when a curve was defined to start and defined to end. |
Well, you are more stupid than I thought :D
| Albatross wrote: |
|---|
| A circle however is injective, closed, and continuous, meaning you can reposition the start and endpoint wherever you like on the path described by the curve as long as they are the same point. |
Mind that doing so will change your mapping. This means that you have a different circle now. Don't forget that the circle is the mapping itself, not the image of the mapping.
| Albatross wrote: |
|---|
| Having a possibility of a start point and end point being anywhere on a path of non-zero length as long as the location of both points is the same could be problematic in regards to determining where the real one is, no? The defined start and end points are merely for simplicity. |
Again, you're mistaking the mapping for its image.
Last edited on
@m4ster r0shi:
I edited my post just before you posted. I meant continuous, and later dropped all the redundancy. Inferring someone is stupid (I'm sorry, more stupid than previously thought) without knowledge of their mental workings and due to assumptions that they said EXACTLY what they meant only proves you are more stupid than I thought (and I have something to back that thought up). :D
-Albatross
EDIT: I edit my posts too much.
I edited my post just before you posted. I meant continuous, and later dropped all the redundancy. Inferring someone is stupid (I'm sorry, more stupid than previously thought) without knowledge of their mental workings and due to assumptions that they said EXACTLY what they meant only proves you are more stupid than I thought (and I have something to back that thought up). :D
-Albatross
EDIT: I edit my posts too much.
Last edited on
| Albatross wrote: |
|---|
| Calling someone stupid without knowledge of their mental workings only proves you are stupid. |
Yeah, whatever...
I could get myself a new achievement for too much editing...
Regardless... here's something to chew on... if someone traveled back in time to kill their mother after she was impregnated with that someone, what would happen?
-Albatross
Regardless... here's something to chew on... if someone traveled back in time to kill their mother after she was impregnated with that someone, what would happen?
-Albatross
Time Traveler's Immunity protects things brought from an original timeline to a new timeline via time travel, so the time traveler would still exist.
QWERTYman +1
Usually, a time machine cannot modify the timeline from which it was used. Think of it as a function that accepts an argument by value. A new, temporary timeline is created on the time-space continuum stack and whatever happens there doesn't affect the original timeline. This is widely known as the TTI principle (Time Traveler's Immunity) and ISO forbids the creation of time machines that don't support it. However, there are some old time machines non standard-compliant that don't have this feature and treat the timeline they're used from more like a function treats a void pointer argument...
Usually, a time machine cannot modify the timeline from which it was used. Think of it as a function that accepts an argument by value. A new, temporary timeline is created on the time-space continuum stack and whatever happens there doesn't affect the original timeline. This is widely known as the TTI principle (Time Traveler's Immunity) and ISO forbids the creation of time machines that don't support it. However, there are some old time machines non standard-compliant that don't have this feature and treat the timeline they're used from more like a function treats a void pointer argument...
| after she was impregnated with that someone |
Personally, I like a solution to the grandfather paradox where paradoxical "modifications" are prevented by applying Finagle's Law on the time traveler. Basically, all attempts will fail no matter what.
A funny side effect of TTI is that there's always one timeline (which I'll call timeline 0) where anything sent back in time can never return to it by any means, yet a sentient traveler wouldn't necessarily be aware of it.
A more interesting paradox is the ontological paradox. I love this animation that demonstrates it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Time-travel-causal-loop.gif It's like shooting two portals onto parallel walls and running forever, only the ends of the portals exist at different times.
| shooting two portals onto parallel walls |
http://www.stuffwelike.com/stuffwelike/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/portals.jpg
Disregard that the walls aren't parallel.
Also how do you shoot the orange portal on a mac?
Ok this not a programming question but an issue of IDE vs compilier issue. First of all (I know what it means) when someone calls a compilier an IDE i feel threatened i mean it sounds like something that is coming from iraq or somewhere else. When i go online to look for a compilier i don't google IDE. I've used the term compilier so long that that's only thing i have ever called it. It's been that way since i heard someone tell me to program i need a compilier now when you say to someone compilier it seems they have issues of calling it an IDE but it's still a compilier if it compiles programs so what's the issue of IDE as opposed to saying compilier?
| Also how do you shoot the orange portal on a mac? |
http://unrealitymag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/portal-via-mac.jpg
BTW, doesn't Ctrl-Click work?
Last edited on
Maybe, or maybe it's the weird command key thing. This one: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/182/377964662_356c8a5072.jpg
You can always just plug a regular, unretarded mouse. While you're at it, just go ahead and etc.
How many times have I had to tell Mac users that they CAN set up a two-button click with any Apple mouse or trackpad in System Preferences? That's the setup I'm using.
-Albatross
-Albatross
Last edited on
You all assume that your way of thinking is superior than the Mac way of thinking. (You're wrong.)
Think like a Mac when using a Mac.
Think like Windows when using Windows.
Think like Gnome/KDE/whatever when using *nix.
Each system is designed under different philosophies, which are neither superior nor inferior to one another.
Think like a Mac when using a Mac.
Think like Windows when using Windows.
Think like Gnome/KDE/whatever when using *nix.
Each system is designed under different philosophies, which are neither superior nor inferior to one another.