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.

Explain!

! This comment has been moved to speculations for want of backing.

Your percieved notion of the evidence, in fact. Which may or may not be what the book suggests as veracity.

Haha excuse me?

no no, outside internet forums I am a very different human being. Wouldnt like to lack in said teeth as superior ones are difficult to find replacements for, and these are original 24 carat teeth. (Good for carrots lol...carat...carrot..get it? pun haha) Im a post-pubescent specimen as of the time of writing of this post.

lol possible proof google search that bioltechnological android has more than one way of showing results, meaning it possibly evolved into a opinionated android over time. There is no element of vanity in my post. Pure scientific questions and discussion. After all beauty is rooted in science as the link shows.

If you look at my face (here it is) you will notice the near perfect symmetery in my features, which surely have a evolutionary advantage to it. They fit the famous 'golden ratio' theory that states that the more symmeteric one's face is, the more superior one is as a human being in some ways. Heres the theory https://interestingengineering.com/phi-and-the-mathematics-of-beauty What say? Am I superior, if only in symmetery? P.S if you do a reverse image search on that photo google actually identifies me as 'human' which supposing you view google search as a bio technological process, (half human half robot like a android) you will be pleased to see the verdict of a unbiased android resonates with me being a typical Human. Which I find most invigourating! Besides the law of the survival of the fittest contends that the most average blokes are the ones who are the most likely to evolve.

I think racism goes beyond social or ethnic barriers into fundemental differences between human beings. Like, as Phi for all posted recently, and I quote "Are you kidding?! "Those different-looking bastards want to take what we have, destroy what we are, how we behave as a people." "They have strange ways and don't respect the same things we do." What's illogical about that? It may be backward, antiquated thinking, but it's logically consistent." That's pretty much spot on. Biological wiring to be antiquely illogical about differences percieved and understood about each other.

the UN levies taxes on a nation's emission quota under the Kyoto protocol which is like an inverse version of 'cap and trade' which defines incentives for LESS pollution as opposed to fines levied on EXCESS production which is the case here.

trolling? If you conscientously perused my journey from lepton through quark to inglorious meson you will have availed yourself of the disposition of the pitfalls and perils that besought me at every corner and the steps I took to overcome them. Here are the pitfalls and solutions in that order 1.Ignorance: I endeavoured to enknowedgeanize my self 2.Unfounded theories: I stopped posting them after the CERN thread. Trolling was as far from my aims as the sun is from the earth (relatively speaking) Now, if you mean my last post, I was hinting at the fact that I did gain a lot of relevant info on what avenues I ought to be pursuiing in the construe of a perfect solution for global warming as per my undersea emission idea. There are the objections to that theory no doubt but I can now concentrate my research on those alone. i.e rising pH levels in seawater, the cheif objection to my idea. All these gleaned through my discussion here.