>> ^sillma:

well that clip was utter waste of my time.


Oh? Oh... You don't say. Um... Hey, what a lovely Top 15 over there!

>> ^kceaton1:

I could destroy her whole concept by reducing the entire mathematical world to a structure scheme that can ONLY be ever displayed as a fractional environment, except for 0 or infinity, as they are special forces unto Math.

Vi actually covers this briefly when she talks about Hyperreals. Also, you wouldn't be destroying her whole concept by reducing the mathematical world to a fractional environment, as this already exists: What you describe is the set of Rational Numbers, where all numbers can be expressed as a fraction of two integers. .999... is still describable as the series 9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000... so the concept is still sound, and still sums to 1 (or 1/1). As an aside, 0 is a rational number and can be expressed as a fraction as well. Infinity is not a number.

Finally, in before "Now you're just nitpicking" or "You don't have to be a dick." At this level, nitpicking and checking for consistency is what Mathematics is all about, so please expect it.

>> ^kceaton1:

So I would ask her this question concerning .9999~ not equaling one. If we take two pinballs and start to count all the electrons--but, midway through we strip ONE electron from one pin; essentially making this our .9999~ pinball. By the time we get done counting the electrons which pinball will have less and which will have more? Well the problem is that IN FACT the pinball that had one taken off could actually NOW have more than the other pinball. So do either actually equal one?

There is a fundamental flaw in this reasoning, which is that the number of electrons in both pinballs is finite. You will eventually stop counting, and when you divide (electrons in Pinball A) by (electrons in Pinball B) you end up with a rational number which is not 1, but also not equal to .999..., so the test is inconclusive. Assuming both pinballs had an infinite number of electrons in them also does not help, as then the answer to "what is ePA/ePB" is "I will never stop counting" (implying correctly that Infinity - 1 = Infinity).

>> ^kceaton1:
This is why Mathematics are very specific, but in use--in the field--they will have LARGE caveats where the majority of the mental masturbation falls completely apart. Because, many of these discussions DO OCCUR at the EXTREMES of Math (if you know what I mean) and fundamentally the only places that use these parts are in extreme measurements; measurements where chance can become a powerful player.

I actually disagree with you here, though I think in practice we both have the same respect for Mathematics, so you can take or leave that disagreement as you please. In my mind Mathematics is "absolute" because it has been proven to be consistent, so the mental exercises are valid even in extreme cases. In those extreme cases sometimes things need to be added to what is already known to correctly describe what is going on or how something works, but the math that has come before is still sound. In fact, the soundness of Mathematics is the whole reason we can add onto it -- Because we know that it will not break. If it does, then we have done something wrong.

>> ^yellowc:

It's not impossible to miss but really, he shouldn't have.
What made him miss was pressure or lack of awareness of where exactly he was standing.


Or he could have not given up halfway through the play. In the slow-mo closeup you can see him hesitate after the ball bounces off the post -- He's so shocked that his shot didn't go in that he fails to block the rebound. Sure, heat of the moment blah blah blah, but if he had followed the ball until it had gone in instead of thinking he was done after he touched it, he still would have made that goal.

Been a while since I've watched this... Or *begged for it...

*dead, but I'm pretty sure this is a replacement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic

Guess not. In that case, let's go with *kill

Can I call *isdupe on my own video?

>> ^Boise_Lib:

Sorry,
dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-South-American-Sledgehammer-Bomba


Whoops, missed this. Thanks!

I still think this is cool, so *beg

*kill

>> ^Porksandwich:

I guess the guy could turn it around on them. If they value followers at 2.50 each. Then he should be owed for setting up and maintaining the account that they benefited from. Since if they have worth, they must be cashing in on them somehow...and now no longer can since he left the company.


Or better yet, the twitter followers themselves join in a class action lawsuit against PhoneDog for "selling" something that does not belong to them (their twitter follows). I'm fairly sure that's fraud...

*promote for =

Private? What the...

Hoosiers are from Indiana, not Illinois THANK YOU VERY MUCH. Upvote anyways.