Blog Comments

  1. The Geek's Avatar
    I've heard something about reddit having a collective aneurysm over the last minute SSB reveals. Is that what this is about?
  2. Ivan The Mouse's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Mcjon01
    Then you're not anybody who's following it, now, are you?
    Yes, that's why I'm asking where do I get a front row seat.
  3. Mcjon01's Avatar
    Then you're not anybody who's following it, now, are you?
  4. Ivan The Mouse's Avatar
    How can we do that if we don't know what we should follow?
  5. aldeayeah's Avatar
    It's a fun exercise.

    Spoiler:
    Quick and dirty proof of the fact that it can't be done
    (based on modular arithmetic; there may be other, more elegant proofs, but this one is mine. And it works.)

    1. You start with exactly 1 I.
    2. You are required to end with exactly 0 Is.
    3. The four operators allow you to change the number of Is in this way: a) No change b) x2 c) -3 d) No change.
    4, The only operator that decreases the number of Is is c, which decreases it by 3 at a time.
    5. Therefore, the only way to end up with 0 Is is for the number of Is to be a multiple of 3 at some point.
    6. The initial number of Is (that is, 1) is not a multiple of 3.
    7. Applying operators a or d doesn't change the number of Is.
    7. Applying operator b (that is, multiplying by 2) to a number that is not a multiple of 3 can't make it a multiple of 3.
    8. Applying operator c (that is, substracting 3) to a number that is not a multiple of 3 can't make it a multiple of 3.
    9. Therefore, it is impossible for the number of Is to become a multiple of 3 at any point.
    10. Therefore, it is impossible for the number of Is to become 0.


    Spoiler:
    Same proof with different notation.

    Let in be the number of "I"s in the text string after n operations.

    We have 4 operators that change the value of i thus:

    a) in+1=in
    b) in+1=2in
    c) in+1=in-3
    d) in+1=in

    Since the initial string is MI, we have i0=1

    If a solution MU exists after N steps, that means iN=0

    We will now prove that such a solution cannot be reached from the given conditions.

    1. If i0=1, then i0≡1 (mod 3)

    2. If iN=0, then iN≡0 (mod 3)

    3. As for the operators:

    a) If in+1=in, then in+1≡in (mod 3)
    b) If in+1=2in, then in+1≡-in (mod 3)
    c) If in+1=in-3, then in+1≡in (mod 3)
    d) If in+1=in, then in+1≡in (mod 3)

    4. Given these operators and the initial conditions, for every value of n, either

    in≡1 (mod 3) if operator b has been applied an even number of times
    in≡-1 (mod 3) if operator b has been applied an odd number of times

    5. Therefore, n does not exist such that in≡0 (mod 3)

    6. Therefore, a solution does not exist. QED.
    Updated May 20th, 2014 at 01:05 PM by aldeayeah
  6. Huitante's Avatar
    I'm at the last hundred pages of the same book now. My favorite part was where author explains the proof of Godel's theorem. So cathartic.
    And the story about kawaii Indian mathematician.
  7. bahamut zero's Avatar
    "MUh Issues"
  8. Tobias's Avatar
    sjack, this is a public warning. stop flaming.
  9. Kotonoha's Avatar
    still scrubbed

    Goodness gracious me.
  10. sjack's Avatar
    scrubbed.
    Updated April 25th, 2014 at 07:43 AM by Tobias
  11. DreamsRequiem's Avatar
    A link for reference:
  12. Nihilm's Avatar
    This entertains me.
  13. The Geek's Avatar
    *sips espresso* *plays bongos*
  14. Petrikow's Avatar
    Does this count as being noticed?

    I must consult Sakura.
  15. Mcjon01's Avatar
    I have a handy memory trick to remember ratstsrub's user name where I ask my brain how to spell it and then I spell ratstsrub.
  16. I3uster's Avatar
    Its easier to pronounce without reading it backwards.
  17. aldeayeah's Avatar
    I'm pretty sure I had already seen something like that before.

    (I'm talking about the beginning of Genesis voiced over a depiction of the big bang, inflation, galaxy formation, star formation, planet formation, etc)
  18. ratstsrub's Avatar
    Noah was actually an ok movie.

    The Biblical parts were the worst parts, but I think I mentioned in a blog post that it had one of the most absolutely hilarious depiction of the creation story I've ever seen.
  19. LJ3's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by aldeayeah
    I kinda enjoyed it but didn't really get into it. Maybe if it hadn't been Russell Crowe, and I hadn't known the ending beforehand...

    Also, the gratuitous use of drugs in the film amused me.

    Also, Sem is totally useless. Every single time he appeared on screen I wanted to punch his chiseled, perfect face.

    ...It's a bit sad when a biblical movie suffers from the fact that it's a biblical movie.

    Spoiler:
    I was totally hoping that Noah would stay murderous, and his wife/sons would kick his ass
    Yeah, looking up the plot of what goes down in the movie actually made me inclined to give it a shot.
  20. Ratman's Avatar
    Equilibrium is also largely a Mocking Bird ripoff
    But implying somebody reads old SF
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast