thethinkertank

If I dont brush my teeth, will I die? Of course not. I THINK therefore I am, not I BRUSH therefore I bruh. The logic is impeccable. The argument against brushing teeth is thus demonstrated.

I must refuse, on grounds of plaigarism. The only person I'd share my credit with for no reason is swansont, because he seems an unnaturally intelligent scientist who was born in the wrong era (if this was 1945 he would be in the history books for discovering something great like relativity) How do I know? Ah. And even if I did go about sharing my credit, it would only be if swansont agreed to help me with the technical points in my theory. Say for instance I've discovered for the first time ever that 2+2=4, but only a mathematics phD can explain WHY it is so. So I collaborate with the mathematician. In this case, the finding of the exact shape of a 4D graph, pioneered by yours truly and swansont. What do you say swansont?

Correct, but what would the shape of the graphical representation be?

What I meant is, (a 4d graph has a different 'look' than a typical 3D one.) A unique shape. Can you deduce that shape/has it already been done?

Has anybody ever figured out how to represent the 4th dimension (in terms of x, y z and t, time,) in a graph? If so, what shape would that graph assume? Certainly not a typical three way graph with a fourth axis just splayed boringly and lazily across it. No, there is a much more innovative way of doing so and I believe I am the only one to have figured it out. But in case I am wrong, it would be one of only two people in history who could have also figured it out: Einstein and Swansont, that excellent intellect. Now, Einstein is deceased, so only swansont remains. I therefore put the question to him.

Empty space is the absence of protons, neutrons and electrons in a vacuum

Am I allowed to abandon a topic that goes around in circles, citing lack of tools to research sufficient answers? Lets call this topic a no go, for example. If such is allowed. If not, I will try to come up with more answers.

Note: I mailed the UN and other related organisations online and offline, totalling approximately 40-50, about my theory of solving the US China trade war. For what it's worth.

I agree this is most likely to be the most probable scenario.

I disagree with you there. I think the RFID system would be even safer than existing methods. Because the RFID system would basically consist of a two way storage system, with only authorized personnell like the government having a database of peoples personal information. The RFID chip itself would be implanted in the human being and thus short of physical violence would be impossible to obtain by unauthorised parties like would be hackers. There is no conceivable third point at which information storage would exist, as is the case with traditional methods. For example the prevailing cyber network of information, e.g paypal allows third parties with know how to access via a computer anywhere in the world. But that is not possible with a RFID system, consisting of chippee, chip, and chipper. A secure three way point of privacy storage. RFID chips!

I believe this technology will sooner or later become vogue all over the globe. People are all about trendsetting to the tune of efficiency and time saving and security. But wouldnt this kind of electronic chipping system dehumanize human beings to some extent?

http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=104 That link showcases a story that clients of a nightclub were once chipped with RFID verichips, a means of electronically identifying them. Do you think this is a trend that may soon become global? Also how does it impact human beings to be chipped on a social, economical and psychological level?

https://www.lenntech.com/greenhouse-effect/kyoto-policy-measures.htm Please refer 'taxes' under that article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions That link gives you info on the emission quota per country where you can see USA has a emission quota half of that of China. https://www.google.com/search?ei=WgELXevhDMXw9QP7ipj4Bg&q=kyoto+protocol+emission+taxes&oq=kyoto+protocol+emission+taxes&gs_l=psy-ab.3..33i21j33i160.4147.9766..9890...0.0..0.280.5785.0j11j17......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j0j0i131j0i67j0i131i67j0i22i30.YI_VRHWCmhA The definition of 'Kyoto protocol emission taxes' which is the fee a nation pays for carbon dioxide emitted per tonne of CO2 emitted. Thank you for the additional statistics contributed. If you combine the three links i posted just now, you can see that China's emission quota is twice that of USA's. Since the Kyoto protocol levies taxes on CO2 emission of a nation, therefore the USA tax would be half that of the China tax. P.S If you would like me to make a brand new thred encompassing all the questiuons asked in this thread and the relevant info I would be happy to do so. Call it a revised version of my Emissions trade us china trade theory.

Apartheid is a good example, so yes.

ah I see.