Author |
Message |
Kajin
|
Post Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:58 pm |
|
Gatekeeper of Niftiness |
|
Offline |
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:16 am Posts: 9081
Location: Praise be to the sticky elastic bands of the Healing Gauze
|
I don't normally speak for others, but in this case I'll make an exception. No one here is interested in overweight Pokemon furry fans. At least I hope not, anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edguy
|
Post Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 3:48 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:13 pm Posts: 132
WLM: [email protected]
Location: Norway
|
Kajin wrote: I don't normally speak for others, but in this case I'll make an exception. No one here is interested in overweight Pokemon furry fans. At least I hope not, anyway. Rule 34.1: If it exists, someone is turned on by it.
|
|
|
|
|
drachefly
|
Post Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 11:22 am |
|
Member of the Fraternal Order of the Emergency Pants |
|
Offline |
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 12:00 am Posts: 3167
AOL: drachefly
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
I'm turned on by triplets...
... of integers which, when taken to a third or higher integer power, sum to zero.
~~~~
By the way, it's not at all rule 34 on MLP, but I did encounter a humorgasm when it was suggested that if SG1 were running today, Teal'c would be a brony, at least a few toss-off lines worth.
|
|
|
|
|
CCC
|
Post Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:40 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 12:00 am Posts: 11381
|
drachefly wrote: I'm turned on by triplets...
... of integers which, when taken to a third or higher integer power, sum to zero. Aside from the trivial case of zero, zero and zero, that's impossible (assuming that all three are to be raised to the same power). The proof is trivial for even powers (an integer to an even power is always positive), but the odd-numbered case is too long to fit into this post. If I'm allowed to raise some of them to different integer powers, then I can find examples.
|
|
|
|
|
quantumcat42
|
Post Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:04 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:43 pm Posts: 710
|
CCC wrote: drachefly wrote: I'm turned on by triplets...
... of integers which, when taken to a third or higher integer power, sum to zero. Aside from the trivial case of zero, zero and zero, that's impossible (assuming that all three are to be raised to the same power). The proof is trivial for even powers (an integer to an even power is always positive), but the odd-numbered case is too long to fit into this post. If I'm allowed to raise some of them to different integer powers, then I can find examples. Technically speaking, it doesn't have to exist to be turned on by it.
|
|
|
|
|
Grillick
|
Post Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:13 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:09 pm Posts: 5432
Website: http://grillick.blogspot.com
WLM: [email protected]
Yahoo Messenger: Giltaras
AOL: Giltaras
Location: Brooklyn, NY
|
CCC wrote: The proof is trivial for even powers (an integer to an even power is always positive), but the odd-numbered case is too long to fit into this post. Very cute, Pierre. It would have been better if you had said "The proof for the odd-numbered case is marvelous, but this post is too small for it."
|
|
|
|
|
drachefly
|
Post Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:22 pm |
|
Member of the Fraternal Order of the Emergency Pants |
|
Offline |
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 12:00 am Posts: 3167
AOL: drachefly
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
Dangit, I was trimming it down and forgot to require them to be nonzero. I think I had 'distinct' in there, but replaced it with something else. Oh, right. I rephrased it down from 'sets of three integers' to pick up the triplets pun. Set of three would have been unambiguous... at least if we understand sets don't contain duplicates.
|
|
|
|
|
CCC
|
Post Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:00 am |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 12:00 am Posts: 11381
|
I see no reason why a set of three items should not contain duplicates, if it has not been specified as a set of distinct items.
"Distinct integers" or "nonzero integers" would have been unambiguous, though. It'd even work with "nonzero rational numbers".
|
|
|
|
|
Edguy
|
Post Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:39 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:13 pm Posts: 132
WLM: [email protected]
Location: Norway
|
I've found out that, even though I'm fairly good at both the english language and math, it's pretty hard when you mix those together!
(I'm Norwegian..)
|
|
|
|
|
LeoChopper
|
Post Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:48 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 12:00 am Posts: 1437
Location: Department of obvious temporal physics!
|
CCC wrote: I see no reason why a set of three items should not contain duplicates, if it has not been specified as a set of distinct items. Because that's what a set means to mathematicians. Elements are in, or not. They use other words for things that can contain duplicates, like "triplet".
|
|
|
|
|
Steavie
|
Post Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:19 pm |
|
Gatekeeper of Niftiness |
|
Offline |
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:54 am Posts: 5115
Location: Australia
|
|
|
|
|
Zillatain
|
Post Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2012 9:33 pm |
|
Admin of Slight Inconvenience |
|
Offline |
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:07 pm Posts: 6070
Location: Someplace other than where I am.
|
Perspective is the ____
...and the site won't let me put the URL without it altering it to "poop". Okay then.
http://perspective.isthe (put s-word here) .net/
Disclaimer: Contains the s-word in URL and page.
|
|
|
|
|
vampirebunbun
|
Post Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:01 am |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 12:00 am Posts: 4577
Location: Destroying the world.
|
|
|
|
|
rmharman
|
Post Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:49 pm |
|
|
Offline |
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:27 pm Posts: 73
Website: http://auros.livejournal.com/
Location: San Mateo, CA
|
|
|
|
|
AlternateTorg
|
Post Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:00 pm |
|
Member of the Fraternal Order of the Emergency Pants |
|
Offline |
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 12:00 am Posts: 2994
|
|
|
|
|
|