Science/Mathematics Thread
| A_of-s_t | May 4 2008, 7:40 pm | Post #21 |
![[Avatar]](/uploads/avatar/143.jpg) Master of Temptation, Ruler of Aeronotics, and Secret Lover
|
Its easy to find two sets with these proerties if you can use 1 and 0. But, if you are limited to whole numbers greater than (but NOT equal to) 1, then it becomes near impossible. I don't think there is an easy way to prove, or disporve the idea.
|
||
 From silent: "lolol First of all wikipedia is flawed because anyone can come into it and post anything. About criticism.. no. You can't just change the definition of a word and expect everyone to bow down in awe. I am using macro evolution as an identifier between changing from one kind to another kind. I.E. bananas turning into flies. So if you want to argue about this then your argueing about the definition of a word.. Not the theory itself. If you want I can use false evolution, or neverbeenseenbefore evolution instead of macro. Its up to you" This is stupidity. Please look at it very closely -- notice that almost every logical fallacy is used in it. |
Users reading this topic: (plus 1 guests)
![[close]](/images/up.gif)
[03:34 pm]
[03:34 pm]
[03:22 pm]
[01:50 pm]
[01:49 pm]
[01:49 pm]
©2003-2008 Staredit Network.
Starcraft & Starcraft II are trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment.
Site Index | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Contributions
Starcraft & Starcraft II are trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment.
Site Index | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Contributions