unreality

I've discovered many things fit to die for. We all discover them, every day. Everything around us, the world, the earth, the universe, other people... they're all fit to die for. You don't need to have a god to have something that you would die for. So yeah the quote is irrelevant also I think discussion of this is also going on in another topic between Scraff and Duh Puck I think, is there any way they can be merged?

Okay, I would love to debate you, but you don't understand the simple concepts of debate. I said it was a hypothetical question! Why cant you understand that??? Okay, I'll make it even simpler: There is a button. You are in a locked cell. You know for a fact that if you press the button it will kill a man in the adjacent cell, through a glass partition, you can see them. They have a similar button, which is wired to kill you. They're running for their button. You cannot talk to them through the glass partition, their back is to you, they are running to the button to kill you and "win". The survivor of the two of you goes free. What do you do? Let him kill you? Or do you press the button and go free? ANSWER THIS WITH "I DIE" OR "I PRESS THE BUTTON"... dont try to turn my hypothetical question into a reality

LOST IN SPACE, WHAT IF THERE WAS A GUY COMING AT YOU HE HAS A KNIFE HE IS INTENT ON KILLING YOU NOTHING YOU CAN SAY WILL STOP HIM NOTHING YOU CAN DO- YOU CANNOT RUN NOR HIDE NOR ANYTHING YOU ARE TRAPPED IN A CORNER BUT... you have a gun. You can shoot him and kill him in the next second to live. HE IS CRAZED, WHO KNOWS WHAT HE'LL DO AFTER KILLING YOU! It's you or him. Your life or his. He doesn't notice the gun. What do you do? *** 1) sorry if that sounds creepy, I'm trying to simplify Ploper's point. I hope nobody like that ever comes after you 2) this is a hypothetical question! So just answer it. lol sorry if this sounds blunt but you were continually missing Ploper's points

Go for it. This is definitely the place for that. Tell us why everything in the Bible must be true. What is it? Because it's old? Because it was written by not just one person but like 20 or something? Because it mentions true events? What is your proof that all of the Bible is real?

This is kind of interesting reading this ;D LIS is saying all conflicts can be solved without "fighting", though he never actually defines fighting. So if he is against the actions of Gahndi (sp?) and MLK, than he thinks nobody should fight with words. Which is what he is doing right now. I believe some kinds of fighting are both okay and necessary, because "fighting" is such a broad word with a broad range of meanings. Debates, for example, are okay and necessary. Same with protests, rallies, even riots sometimes (though usually they get too out of hand). Me (nor Ploper I think) are for things like war and invading other countries to impose your way of thinking. It's just not the right choice. And I think all three of us are together on this, so nobody's really debating anybody here, except semantics of things we've said earlier. In essence, it seems that all three of us agree on the same thing. So I fail to see where this topic is going. If anyone has anything new to add to this, I suggest doing it in the other topic

5! = 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 = 120 120/e = 44 (there's an infinite string of decimals following it but that doesn't matter) 44/120 are the number of combinations where no hat is given back to its previous owner. it works with other numbers, such as 10! or 17!, etc just lop off the decimal part and keep only the integer 1/e = 0.something so there are 0 combinations to give back the hats without giving one to its previous owner if there is only 1 person, obviously 2/e = .7something, which would be 0... even though with 2 hats there would be 1 combination where neither would get his hat back. So it's not perfect, though it's a pretty good ratio between e and what we're looking for though since we wanted AT LEAST ONE then we had to subtract that from 1 (n!-integer(n!/e))/n! for the 5 people: (120-44)/120 = 76/120 = .6333333 chance that at least one person gets their hat back

I didn't edit my post. And "Lost in space" don't talk to us like we want to go starting wars. I'm a pacifist. I'm wholeheartedly against war. I was trying to support Ploper's post about how there are other ways to fight that don't involve violence... like what MLK did with words. etc. Fighting doesn't necessarily mean bombing another country. So don't attack us repeatedly and dont say we "are fighting each other and are gamblers and would have a lot to offer to the world bla bla bla", I'm just as anti-war than you, maybe even more so EDIT: i just reread your post and it seems even more rediculous now. Nowhere did I ever say that I advocate war or fighting. I am against such things, though sometimes I acknowledge that it has been successful (some guerrilla war campaigns have brought peace, I think, though I'm not sure), and that was part of my post, though most was about how "fighting" is a loose word, and fighting WITH peace, such as what Ghandi and Martin Luther King did, and this actually works and can bring about peace, which is what me and Ploper were saying. Are you against that? Are you against resisting a forceful government? Are you against the things that people like Ghandi and MLK did? I'm not, and neither is Ploper, and that's what we meant by our posts. You have no right to criticize and call us 'unfit for society' and other things that you implied when you know NOTHING against us! I dont know about Ploper, but I am strongly anti-war. Lost In Space, it seems like YOU are the one who is fighting. But I'm gonna let this go and you leave you be, and I hope Ploper does the same and forgives you too, and let's hope you don't say anything else so distressing to people you don't even know

no, it's simple math. 1+.5x = x it follows that 1 must be half of x. Therefore x is $2. You fell for the catch of the riddle, geniusman

Yep you got em now, bonanova! ;D so nobody got the trick with e?

When you say "you cannot die of suffocation", do you mean no matter how long you stay in the room, fresh air will come from somewhere? Or is it part of a riddle somehow where you can strangle yourself with the telephone cable and not suffocate? Is it worth mentioning enough that the fact is important to riddle solution is what I'm saying... if it's not it would be more "exciting" to be a race against the clock, know what I mean? Leading me to think that the solution involves something that would normally suffocate you (for example, staying in the sealed room for a long time, more than would normally be possible, or strangling yourself with the telephone cable, etc). Am I on the right track here?

hehehe

LostInSpace, think of it like an investment. Would you say losing money so that you can gain money later (hopefully, lol) is impossible? It's not. It happens every day (and more often the money is lost hehe, but that's relevant to the finances, the basic idea is what I'm talking about here). As Ploper said, you can fight the people that are breaking the peace- yes there will be even less peace for a bit, but after that, peace. (If all goes according to your plans that is, but this isn't a discussion about military statistics or anything like that )

76/120 is correct for [a]

I guess nobody discovered the catch then ... I could have given this riddle out with 1000 spectators, and would you all have been able to figure out the solutions using the same methods? hang with me here, I am leading somewhere: 5! is 120, so there are 120 possible combinations of the hats and the five spectators of those, exactly 44 result in no hat being given back to its previous owner yes, I could make a list of the entire sample space... but if there were 10 spectators? Would I want to list 3,628,800 (10!) different possibilities? no way Just do 120/e (e as in the transcendental exponential identity, 2.718281828459045...), which gives you 44.14553294..., of which the integer part is 44. That's how many possible permutations there are where no hat is given back to its previous owner (120-44)/120 = 76/120 = .633333333 chance that at least one person gets their hat back (n!-integer(n!/e))/n! that was [a] - [d] was intended to trick everyone's minds, lol, I dont even have answers for those, though I could *probably* figure em out if necessary lol still think it's a shaggy dog puzzle, bonanova? ;D

Exactly. 0/0 isnt always 1 (though it can be). 0^0 is equal to 0/0, so the same applies. Bonanova was saying that 0^0 is a special case of 0/0 only if the current meaning of 0/0 was 1, however I am disputing that. He is using the function created by x^y as evidence, but a wedding ring doesn't make you married. Being married makes you have the wedding ring. The laws of exponents are the laws of exponents, nothing else as far as I know. 0^0 = 0/0. Though maybe bonanova has some more proof showing that 0^0 is only a special case of 0/0 and somehow set apart differently, I'd like to see it

if you're trying to say that atheists are "unsafe" and "confused" because we don't believe in a god, you are very wrong, my friend. In fact we are safer and less confused than we are, because there are no errors or paradoxes in what we know. Our knowledge is adamant and firm. We are not tryng to "discover through science incontrovertible proof to feel safe" as you are suggestion. We are discovering such proofs to find the truth of life. And if you are shying away from what we have found to be self-evident than YOU are the one shying away from knowledge just to feel safe with your notion of God instead of exploring oppposite notions. yep I exist that doesnt mean that a God made me exist though

I suggest locking this cuz there's two discussions of the same thing

0 is a number too 0 real and 0 imaginary on the complex plane (in other words, the origin point of the complex plane) bonanova: I could also use limits to prove, with x/y, that as y approaches 0, the answer approaches infinity as it gets bigger and bigger (and thus disprove the any value agreement). So in both cases 'limits' and 'algebra' are saying different things. In both cases, they're undefined. 0/0 is undefined. 0^0 is undefined. The function of x^y is just following the trend of exponents, of which x^0 is simply expressed by the laws of exponents as x/x. Since 0/0 is not always 1, neither is 0^0. Then again, it could be blue cows ;D Rule #1: There's an exception to every rule (including Rule #1) lol

yep bonanova, 0^0 would be 7 if 0/0 also is 7 I did the exact same thing in the topic identical to this in the "Other" section, showing how 0/0 can be anything if you use the multiplicative (or whatever its called) property nx/x = n n0/0 = n 0/0 = n or written another way: 7*0 = 0 reverse it: 7 = 0/0 however to reverse it, you actually have to divide both sides by 0 so it comes out to be: 0/0 = 0/0 which isnt much help lol. But yes, if 0/0 was 7, then 0^0 would be as well ;D

You played Three Games of Zarball and had to win two in a row... you made the right choices (but unfortunately lost). Your second chance for freedom came with the Five Games of Zarball, in which you had to win at least one of three combinations. Again, you lost in a mistake up against the King. However you won your freedom, and deserved it, in the intense Royal Zarball Tournament, where you made your way to victory. Now you have taken the King's offer as the Supreme Dignifiably Appointed Royal Zarball Trainer of Excellence. First, it would help if I explained what zarball really is: As you know, it's a 1-on-1 game of agility, strength, speed, accuracy and skill. It's played on the Zarball Arena on the palace roof, and the Arena is a circle of soft and spongy grass, well-tended by the Royal Gardeners, and high up on the palace roof where it gets a lot of sun, but is cut often by the Royal Gardeners to keep it perfect, just as the King likes it. The circular Zarball Arena is a perfect circle, with a radius of 20 feet. Around it's circumference is a chest-high woven fence where the front-row spectators, coaches, referees, ball lackeys and score-keepers stand. There are a ring of seats and bleachers surrounding the Arena after that. At the center of the Arena is a hole with a diameter of 1 foot 2 inches, thus a radius of 7 inches, and since the center of the hole corresponds with the center of the circle, takes up the first 7 inches of the radius of the Arena. Why is the hole 1 foot 2 inches in diameter? Because the zarballs are 1 foot in diameter, and they go in the hole. Back to that in a sec. There are two players in zarball. The Red Player and the Blue Player. There are three balls: red, blue and green. If a red ball is scored, the Red Player gets 1 point. If a blue ball is scored, the Blue Player gets 1 point. And if a green ball is scored, 1 point is given to the player with the least amount of points- and if it is a tie, no points are given. So how do you score a ball? By throwing it in the central hole of course ;D One of the big reasons that the Zarball Arena is on the palace roof is that there are ball lackeys in the Catch Room, as it's called, directly underneath the Zarball Arena, who take the balls that are scored (they fall through the hole from the Arena above to a basket in the Catch Room placed underneath the hole). The ball lackeys then slot the ball back in a device which spins it around the circle and pops it out randomly from underneath the fence at the edge of the circle, where the ball quickly rolls back into play. The three balls are initially placed at a random angle and a random radius from 2 feet to 18 feet from the center of the Arena. There are other rules as to how you can take the ball and score it in the hole, but those aren't important to this riddle. What is important is how you win: (of course that's important) When you get 10 points. Yep, easy as that. That should be important in the future, but right now, focus your attention on the five spectators standing at the fence. The King, Queen, Prince, Duke and Earl. They're the first here to see the match between you, Supreme Dignifiably Appointed Royal Zarball Trainer of Excellence, and your prime pupil. Unfortunately there's a gust of wind on the palace roof, and the five spectators, all wearing identical hats rooting for your pupil to win (gee, thanks ), and the hats are blown off of the palace roof and scrambled randomly, by the wind of course, by the time they hit the ground in the palace gardens. No matter, though, the ball lackeys quickly run down, grab the hats, and get back up before there's any Royal Fuss. Not sure whose hat is whose, they hand them out to the King, Queen, Prince, Duke and Earl randomly. a) What are the chances that at least one royal spectator got their hat back? b) What are the chances that EXACTLY ONE person gets their hat back? c) What about exactly two people? d) And finally, what are the chances that MORE THAN TWO of the spectators will get their hats back?

Wow you're right! Good job man! You got it first!

i've heard that a few times, it's a good one I forget who said it though

good point vanago just showed us *goes back to kiddy school*

FIRETRUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's actually C and K, right, bonanova? Cuz F would be 32... (lol, F, C and K.... I should start the Unreality Heat Measurement Scale, just to finish it up)

Yep I think that was what we first said *edit* I checked, writersblock said 60 and 6, then me and cpotting said 33 and 33 cuz it said "father and son" it doesn't require that the father is the father of the son