The Last Word

[edna]

god is dead

God is dead. Signed: Nietzche

Nietzche is dead. Signed: God.

[Farin]

^

[edna]

That was a famous graffiti from the late sixties...

[Farin]

and very funny! I wrote it down, so I won't forget it

[c_s_1987]

If anyone considers the following post sexist - sorry. A proof that women are evil.

First we state the women require time and money.

Women = Time * Money

And everyone knows that "time is money".

Time = Money

So line one can be restated as:

Women = Money * Money

Women = Money^2

We also know that money is "the root of all evil".

Money = sqrt(Evil)

Women = Money^2 = Evil

Women = Evil

Therefore women are evil.

Oh yes, and to edna's post.

Edited December 16, 2006 by Guest

[MarcM]

good night

[Shawna]

Women are all evil. It just takes some of them longer to realize their potential.

[Levis]

I love maths jokes

[c_s_1987]

*reminds self to find more maths jokes*

[Farin]

Postulate 1: Knowledge is Power.

Postulate 2: Time is Money.

As every engineer knows: Power = Work / Time

And since Knowledge = Power and Time = Money

It is therefore true that Knowledge = Work / Money .

Solving for Money, we get:

Money = Work / Knowledge

Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches infinity, regardless of the amount of Work done.

[Levis]

*excited hand clapping*

I'd repeat what I said earlier, but I don't want to pressurise anyone

[The Seeker]

I'm worse at Maths than I thought I was, which isn't very good.

[RonJonSurfer]

During High School Geometry, I stood up in front of the class to explain Euclid's Parallel Postulate....when finished, my teacher said, "Well that was a fine explanation of Ron's Parallel Postulate, what about Euclid's?"

Ahem:

Two lines in two-dimensional Euclidean space are said to be parallel if they do not intersect. In three-dimensional Euclidean space, parallel lines not only fail to intersect, but also maintain a constant separation between points closest to each other on the two lines. Lines in three-space that are not parallel but do not intersect are called skew lines.

If lines and are parallel, the notation is used.

In a non-Euclidean geometry, the concept of parallelism must be modified from its intuitive meaning. This is accomplished by changing the so-called parallel postulate. While this has counterintuitive results, the geometries so defined are still completely self-consistent.

In a triangle , a triangle median bisects all segments parallel to a given side

(OK I know you know I cheated to get this information)

[Levis]

Thank you.

But that wasn't a joke...

[RonJonSurfer]

My teacher thought it was.

[Levis]

There's just one part I don't understand so I disregard it.

I don't know Euclidian anything so it might be entirely my fault if I understand what I do.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Guest

[Shawna]

I'm no good with math, either, so everything that RonJohn said is completely beyond me. I do, however, believe in a parallel universe.

However, my question is (and I know I've mentioned this before 100 years ago):

if you're on a plane hurtling through the air at 600 mph, and you jump into the air for a second, does the plane weigh less for that second while you're in the air? And do you stay stationary while the plane continues forward for that second of time?

Things that make you say, "hmmmm..."

[The Seeker]

No, you don't stay stationary, because you've got the same speed as the plane, I think.

I'm not sure about the first part, but I don't think so. You're still inside of the plane.

[RonJonSurfer]

I'm no good with math, either, so everything that RonJohn said is completely beyond me. I do, however, believe in a parallel universe.

However, my question is (and I know I've mentioned this before 100 years ago):

if you're on a plane hurtling through the air at 600 mph, and you jump into the air for a second, does the plane weigh less for that second while you're in the air? And do you stay stationary while the plane continues forward for that second of time?

Things that make you say, "hmmmm..."

That question is on the SAT's isn't it? Therefore, the answer is "C". Thank You.

Oh and one more thing...parallel lines never meet.

[PSYCHOcatholic]

Well...im suing...

You guys made my brain explode...and i kinda needed it.

THANKS!!

[Shawna]

Oh and one more thing...parallel lines never meet.

Mr. Smarty-pants.

[c_s_1987]

Postulate 1: Knowledge is Power.

Postulate 2: Time is Money.

As every engineer knows: Power = Work / Time

And since Knowledge = Power and Time = Money

It is therefore true that Knowledge = Work / Money .

Solving for Money, we get:

Money = Work / Knowledge

Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches infinity, regardless of the amount of Work done.

[c_s_1987]

I'm no good with math, either, so everything that RonJohn said is completely beyond me. I do, however, believe in a parallel universe.

However, my question is (and I know I've mentioned this before 100 years ago):

if you're on a plane hurtling through the air at 600 mph, and you jump into the air for a second, does the plane weigh less for that second while you're in the air? And do you stay stationary while the plane continues forward for that second of time?

Things that make you say, "hmmmm..."

To save you from reading my explanation, the answer to the first part is that it depends on whether you consider the jumping person part of the plane or not, and the answer to the second question is most definitely no.

The problem with the first part of the question is that it really depends on personal opinion. If you think an airborne person inside a plane is part of the plane, then it does weigh the same, but if you do not consider the person to be part of the plane, then it weighs less.

From a physics perspective, the plane does weigh less. The inertia, momentum and kinetic energy of the plane would decrease slightly, and would be transferred to the person. The quantities would then be transferred back to the plane when the person falls to the floor of the plane, since the person can be considered part of the plane again.

If you did remain stationary while you jumped, you would fly backwards in the plane at 600mph (since the plane would be travelling 600mph faster than you), and you would almost certainly die. Even if you were only in the air for one second, you would travel over 250 metres towards the back of the plane in that time.

The reason why you continue to travel at the same speed as the plane while in the air is because of Newton's First Law - "A body at rest remains at rest, and a body in motion continues to move in a straight line with a constant speed unless and until an external unbalanced force acts upon it".

Sorry if I caused further brain explosions.

[Red Fish]

The problem with the first part of the question is that it really depends on personal opinion. If you think an airborne person inside a plane is part of the plane, then it does weigh the same, but if you do not consider the person to be part of the plane, then it weighs less.

From a physics perspective, the plane does weigh less. The inertia, momentum and kinetic energy of the plane would decrease slightly, and would be transferred to the person. The quantities would then be transferred back to the plane when the person falls to the floor of the plane, since the person can be considered part of the plane again.

Man, I was just thinking over this. Good thing we have someone who knows what they're talking about.

[PSYCHOcatholic]

In The Beginning...