Last edited by citricacidx (2007-06-25 14:50:57)
amateur one.deadlikeme667 wrote:
I am physicist. my favorite line from this whole thread
How is all this related to this thread?TheArkOfGod wrote:
I bet you can't make 200 bucks by joining the site below.....please just sign up you don't have to do anything else....thanks
No I didn't. It was the user behind DeathUnlimited's nickname!j4mi3-k1ll3r wrote:
You started this thread !
right well since i posted this a week ago on thursday and no one has proved it wrong i have both won and lost in a paradoxical tandem, which isn't winning, but is closer than anyone else has gottensfarrar33 wrote:
new statement:
I, that is the real living person behind the bf2s account of the name 'sfarrar33', will not think up a claim that you cannot prove wrong. I will also not think this claim up within the next week and I will not post it here in this thread. (sorry i couldn't think of a way to combine those two sentances and make them easily understandable hence the seperation)
Well, Zimmer won one because he refused to take uor provings seriouslysfarrar33 wrote:
right well since i posted this a week ago on thursday and no one has proved it wrong i have both won and lost in a paradoxical tandem, which isn't winning, but is closer than anyone else has gottensfarrar33 wrote:
new statement:
I, that is the real living person behind the bf2s account of the name 'sfarrar33', will not think up a claim that you cannot prove wrong. I will also not think this claim up within the next week and I will not post it here in this thread. (sorry i couldn't think of a way to combine those two sentances and make them easily understandable hence the seperation)
1.) You did think of a claim (or rather could have that) we could not prove wrong. You did it while (or could have thought it when) you were sleeping - and forgot that you did (How would you or I know?).sfarrar33 wrote:
right well since i posted this a week ago on thursday and no one has proved it wrong i have both won and lost in a paradoxical tandem, which isn't winning, but is closer than anyone else has gottensfarrar33 wrote:
new statement:
I, that is the real living person behind the bf2s account of the name 'sfarrar33', will not think up a claim that you cannot prove wrong. I will also not think this claim up within the next week and I will not post it here in this thread. (sorry i couldn't think of a way to combine those two sentances and make them easily understandable hence the seperation)
Last edited by Onidax (2007-06-28 08:37:55)
1) no because if i thought up a claim then i would have posted it, as the statement says the opposite of.topal63 wrote:
1.) You did think of a claim (or rather could have that) we could not prove wrong. You did it while (or could have thought it when) you were sleeping - and forgot that you did (How would you or I know?).sfarrar33 wrote:
right well since i posted this a week ago on thursday and no one has proved it wrong i have both won and lost in a paradoxical tandem, which isn't winning, but is closer than anyone else has gottensfarrar33 wrote:
new statement:
I, that is the real living person behind the bf2s account of the name 'sfarrar33', will not think up a claim that you cannot prove wrong. I will also not think this claim up within the next week and I will not post it here in this thread. (sorry i couldn't think of a way to combine those two sentances and make them easily understandable hence the seperation)
2.) And also, since you did post this statement [the original], by default as soon as you pressed the [submit] button - you were wrong. As you already thought you had come up with a statement that could not be proven wrong (the original statement).
he did? (no way am i hunting through all of these pages)DeathUnlimited wrote:
Well, Zimmer won one because he refused to take uor provings seriously tongue
So he got further
Your rebuttal is not a rebuttal. It is merely you restating your previous assertion over again.sfarrar33 wrote:
1) no because if i thought up a claim then i would have posted it, as the statement says the opposite of.topal63 wrote:
1.) You did think of a claim (or rather could have that) we could not prove wrong. You did it while (or could have thought it when) you were sleeping - and forgot that you did (How would you or I know?).sfarrar33 wrote:
right well since i posted this a week ago on thursday and no one has proved it wrong i have both won and lost in a paradoxical tandem, which isn't winning, but is closer than anyone else has gotten
2.) And also, since you did post this statement [the original], by default as soon as you pressed the [submit] button - you were wrong. As you already thought you had come up with a statement that could not be proven wrong (the original statement).
2)and thats the reason for the paradoxical nature, I made a statement that couldn't be proved wrong (so i win), but was wrong by its very nature (so i loose). If you want to continue to theorise on it then i'm afraid marty the very universe itself and everything we know and love will end!he did? (no way am i hunting through all of these pages)DeathUnlimited wrote:
Well, Zimmer won one because he refused to take uor provings seriously tongue
So he got further
Last edited by topal63 (2007-06-28 11:12:21)
It won't be there forever.petermassingale wrote:
If I have an apple in my left hand, then there will be an apple in my left hand.
But in that case I have proved everything.Onidax wrote:
Proof is nothing without belief. If I dont believe you can prove anything I say to be wrong, then even though you in your own little world can prove anything I say to be wrong I dont believe it. Thus you havnt proven anything.
This is question, not a statement.I0973 wrote:
(x+4)(x+3) = x^2(x-squared) + 12 ?
Nope, it's:I0973 wrote:
(x+4)(x+3) = x^2(x-squared) + 12 ?
Last edited by xBlackPantherx (2007-06-29 01:26:10)
bah it doesn't matter anyway, the time limit on the original statement expired before it was proved wrongtopal63 wrote:
Your rebuttal is not a rebuttal. It is merely you restating your previous assertion over again.sfarrar33 wrote:
1) no because if i thought up a claim then i would have posted it, as the statement says the opposite of.topal63 wrote:
1.) You did think of a claim (or rather could have that) we could not prove wrong. You did it while (or could have thought it when) you were sleeping - and forgot that you did (How would you or I know?).
2.) And also, since you did post this statement [the original], by default as soon as you pressed the [submit] button - you were wrong. As you already thought you had come up with a statement that could not be proven wrong (the original statement).
2)and thats the reason for the paradoxical nature, I made a statement that couldn't be proved wrong (so i win), but was wrong by its very nature (so i loose). If you want to continue to theorise on it then i'm afraid marty the very universe itself and everything we know and love will end!he did? (no way am i hunting through all of these pages)DeathUnlimited wrote:
Well, Zimmer won one because he refused to take uor provings seriously tongue
So he got further
1.) You could have thought of one, in fact you posting proves you're not brain-dead, and you said "I will not think," there is no way for you to demonstrate that you did not think in the last week - that you suffered brain-death. In fact you posting proves the contrary that you did think. So you're wrong.
2.) Could have dreamt (or did dream) the statement, thought of the statement, forgot the statement, it doesn't matter if you posted it or not. All you had to do, to be wrong, was "think" that you had a statement in your mental possession (it being proved wrong, or not being proved wrong, later is not relevant).
3.) This is not a paradox. Your statement is inherently contradictory. A mistake in thought, logic, or grammar is not a paradox.
4.) We don't prove other statements wrong or future statements wrong. We prove the statement posted as being wrong. It doesn't matter to what degree we prove it wrong. As long as you've been proved wrong in some way = done deal = you're wrong.
5.) Just because you did not post the numerous statements you "thought of" that could or could not be proven wrong is not relevant, nor paradoxical. If you were "thinking" of anything at all last week - your posted original statement is wrong. This one - and not any other hypothetical statement.
There is no time limit for us, your self-imposed time limit on you "not-thinking" for a whole week - is irrelevant to us. See the original posted statement [below], that posted statement does not place a time limit on us - proving you wrong. So your statement, that you could not think for whole week, is (and has been) proven wrong and your statement [above] implying there is a time limit (for us) to prove you wrong is also wrong. So you're wrong again (twice proven wrong).sfarrar33 wrote:
bah it doesn't matter anyway, the time limit on the original statement expired before it was proved wrongtopal63 wrote:
Your rebuttal is not a rebuttal. It is merely you restating your previous assertion over again.sfarrar33 wrote:
1) no because if i thought up a claim then i would have posted it, as the statement says the opposite of.
2)and thats the reason for the paradoxical nature, I made a statement that couldn't be proved wrong (so i win), but was wrong by its very nature (so i loose). If you want to continue to theorise on it then i'm afraid marty the very universe itself and everything we know and love will end!
he did? (no way am i hunting through all of these pages)
1.) You could have thought of one, in fact you posting proves you're not brain-dead, and you said "I will not think," there is no way for you to demonstrate that you did not think in the last week - that you suffered brain-death. In fact you posting proves the contrary that you did think. So you're wrong.
2.) Could have dreamt (or did dream) the statement, thought of the statement, forgot the statement, it doesn't matter if you posted it or not. All you had to do, to be wrong, was "think" that you had a statement in your mental possession (it being proved wrong, or not being proved wrong, later is not relevant).
3.) This is not a paradox. Your statement is inherently contradictory. A mistake in thought, logic, or grammar is not a paradox.
4.) We don't prove other statements wrong or future statements wrong. We prove the statement posted as being wrong. It doesn't matter to what degree we prove it wrong. As long as you've been proved wrong in some way = done deal = you're wrong.
5.) Just because you did not post the numerous statements you "thought of" that could or could not be proven wrong is not relevant, nor paradoxical. If you were "thinking" of anything at all last week - your posted original statement is wrong. This one - and not any other hypothetical statement.
and when i quoted the statement i was not making a new statement (that i cared about being proved wrong)
so i win because you didn't prove it wrong, but i loose because it was wrong anyway, and therefore any future attempt to prove it wrong is pointless because it comes down to opinions.
Last edited by topal63 (2007-06-29 08:54:07)
lol i was so busy type squared that i forgot to actually do the sumxBlackPantherx wrote:
Nope, it's:I0973 wrote:
(x+4)(x+3) = x^2(x-squared) + 12 ?
x2+7x+12
EDIT:
P.S.
Remember FOIL (first, outer, inner, last)
x*x, then x*3, then x*4, then 3*4 = x2 +3x +4x +12
combine 3x and 4x = x2 + 7x + 12
Last edited by Axon (2007-06-29 08:26:33)
Without an example (i.e a triangle) that could easily be unrelated to the whole pythagorus crap.Axon wrote:
a squared plus b squared equals c squared.
Last edited by robthemadman (2007-06-29 09:15:07)
Last edited by mkxiii (2007-06-29 09:14:52)
^^BANmkxiii wrote:
note to self - don't tell rob my password
^^ Robs retardedness from earlierrobthemadman wrote:
Without an example (i.e a triangle) that could easily be unrelated to the whole ---------->Pascal <-------- crap.Axon wrote:
a squared plus b squared equals c squared.
For instance:
If A=1 B=2 C=6
A²+B²≠C²
Last edited by mkxiii (2007-06-29 09:20:26)