Re: Getting back to basics

From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_aurigae.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 07/24/04 

Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 16:01:14 GMT

In sci.physics, Kenneth Doyle
<nobody@notmail.com>
 wrote
on Sat, 24 Jul 2004 03:42:37 GMT
<Xns95308B5EF7EFnobodynotmailcom@61.9.191.5>:
> "Spaceman" <Spaceman@realspaceman.com> wrote in
> news:uijMc.172142$Oq2.86618@attbi_s52:
>
>> Are there really 2 answers?
>
>
> You think that's bad? I've discovered a basic error at the very
> foundations of arithmetic. Check this out, 2 * 3 + 4 can either be 10 or
> 14 (in base 10). How can this be? Arithmetic must be wrong.
>

Naaah, just turn it upside down. Then one gets h + E * z.
We've now replaced every specific quantity by a general
variable, making the problem much more flexible.

:-)

Or, redefine '+' as east, '-' as west, and multiplication as
"erm, well, no, you can't do that with vector quantities,
it doesn't make sense; therefore square roots are impossible
and one can't solve simultaneous differential equations or
pursue theoretical rocketry [which requires integration,
usually generating ln(M)/ln(M_0) somewhere]..." 

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
Quantcast