iglak

hehe... what happens if i did...? (we need a shifty eyes smiley)

try to be aware of your posture at all times, especially after any exercise you do. when you sit down, keep your back straight (or as straight as possible). when you rest your hands on your knees, keep your back straight. try to walk/run with your back straight too, but i don't think that's as important as any other times. of course, i don't have any idea if sclerosis is curable or not. for all i know, trying to straighten your back into a good posture whenever you do something might be harmful, but probably not <edit> oh, and it's not "normal", but it's quite common (i think)

and somewhat back on topic... there was a time when i couldn't do any of these things: wink lift my left eyebrow without lifting the right alternate lifting of eyebrows quickly the vulcan "live long and prosper" sign lift my ears (i can't wiggle them though) how did i learn? i saw someone else do it and wanted to raise to their level of control of certain muscles. i also got a friend to learn how to do the vulcan sign by teasing him about it basically, try to get her to keep trying to do it. she'll probably start out by winking one eye and wincing the other. this will slowly change into a real wink. i recommend teasing her about it to give her that little extra motivation any time you tease her she'll probably try to do it, and will get closer every time. however, if she accepts the fact that she can't wink and thinks that she'll never be able to wink, she will have no motivation to learn. stay away from that .

really? well on mythbusters it didn't work with ordinary spoons/forks/knives, nor did it work with aluminum foil. though aluminum foil makes nice arcs of electricity , especially if you fold a long piece into a thin "M" shape and put it in the microwave . (i have no idea how dangerous this is however )

so... we upgrade... and lose features?

a genius is someone who can make connections between 2+ pieces of information that no one thought of before.

hehe... where i live, the highschoolers are practically homophobiphobic and another interesting short (very short) story: one of my friends said something along the lines of "that's so gay" (talking about something that seemed homosexual, not weird). someone else responded with "oh my god, are you a homophobe?" but the strange part is that he is a homosexual (only a few people know)... one that was called a homophobe...

i thought we were posting myths that were false... (my post has also been refuted by mythbusters).

if you put metal in a microwave, it will explode.

a bit off topic but still interesting. any quiz you might find that tell girls if they are right for men, or tell couples that they are right for eachother, the more the girl thinks like the man, the better wife/girlfriend(couple) she(they) is(are). so basically... men like women that act like men, so all men are gay also, women generally like gay men more because they are cleaner, nicer, and generally have better bodies and hair than "straight" men. hehe... just interesting observations, that's all.

yeah, okay, so it IS better to switch than to stay... i was tired when i wrote that, but now it makes even more sense. ^^;

this is one of the ones that YT was talking about, it was (as far as i know) invented by whatever slaves those were , and taught to the other slaves so that they wouldn't be defenseless, but was disguised as a dance.

ah... if you pick a loss and change, it BECOMES a win... that's 2/3 if you pick a win and change, that's a loss, the other 1/3 but if you pick a loss and stay, that's 2/3 and if you pick a win and stay, that's the other 1/3 <edit> so now the question is: is it a seperate choice with 50:50 odds, or is it just the end result of the first choice? lets see... write a computer program that choses between switch or stay AFTER the goat was revealed. like: Amount = 1000000 Randomize Timer() For n = 1 to Amount Car = rnd(2)+1 choice = rnd(2)+1 Goat = car+1 if Goat == 4 then Goat = 1 if goat == choice then goat = goat + 1 if Goat == 4 then Goat = 1 swich_stay = rnd(1) + 1 if switch_stay == 1 then - if choice != car then inc changewin endif if switch_stay == 2 then - if choice == car then inc choicewin endif next n Print "Change and win = "; Changewin Print "Stick to First choice = "; Choicewin suspend for key P.S. hehe... 3 posts in a row with no double posts and no non-relevent posts...

i'm having trouble understanding why these are not 2 seperate cases each, especially the top one. what i was thinking is that you (whoever wrote it first, whatever) are artificially increasing the odd of winning, instead of me artificially decreasing the odds of winning. P.S. either way, it's still 50:50 chances the way you listed it shows 3 wins and 3 losses. they way i posted it shows 4 wins and 4 losses

for those of us that aren't very programming laguage literate, could you explain each line and tell us what programming language you are using? <edit> ah, i see. by that program, change only loses if both choice and car are the same (1/3 chance of that) and stick to choice only wins if choice and car are the same (1/3 chances, again)

hehe... not including decay and a random chance of stronger than ever winds...

that link doesn't explain anything though. all it says is "switch because i said so". it's math is wrong. It said that you first pick with a 1/3 chance. that's correct. then it said that if you stay with that choice, it's still a 1/3 chance. that's incorrect because one choice has been eliminated and you are making a new choice (switch or stay) with a 50:50 chance. It also said that switching increases the chances up to 2/3. that's very incorrect. this is the same new choice with a 50:50 chance. in fact, wich only one good prize, there is no possible way to have chances greater than 50:50 (assuming whole numbers) your math is correct, but it would be better represented like this: Look at it like this, consider door 3 is the winning door. You pick 1. They eliminate 2. You stay on 1. You lose. You pick 1. They eliminate 2. You switch to 3. You win. You pick 2. They eliminate 1. You stay on 2. You lose. You pick 2. They eliminate 1. You switch to 3. You win. You pick 3. They eliminate 1. You switch to 2. You lose. You pick 3. They eliminate 1. You stay on 3. You win. You pick 3. They eliminate 2. You switch to 1. You lose. You pick 3. They eliminate 2. You stay on 3. You win. this totals to a 50:50 chance

here's a link, incase anyone's interested (small article) http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=4568413

wait, i was saying that (assuming the reciever is initiated the instant he goes back in time) the reciever would pick up a signal from SanFransisco (assuming he got to SanFransisco in less than 20 minutes). and if the reciever is initiated 20 minutes before he leaves, then i agree with Cap'n Refsmmat unless they use a wormhole, have a very direct transmition that goes through the wormhole, or a wire, and DON'T walk for 20 minutes (as it would be hard to get a wire long enough and a direct wireless transmition strong enough) they won't see back in time. also, this is assuming no traveling to the future. he's just traveling back in time 20 minutes to that he can get into SanFransisco around the same time he travels back in time

i fink... assuming you travel back in time 20 minutes (somehow avoiding yourself and your friend), and at that moment your frind hooks up the TV to be able to recieve the information from the carmera you took. also at that moment you finish your walk to SanFransisco, then i don't see any reason why your friend wouldn't see a live video of SanFransisco at that moment. a) you'd see SanFransisco as it is the moment you get there (if it's 20 minutes, that'd be the moment your friend hooks up the reciever) b) no reason why it wouldn't (unless you went through something involving electrical disturbance, shorting out the camera... or something like that) c) no idea d) skewed? (what do you mean?)

i would think we do store all of the information we take in (in a compact form). not only do we take in this informaiton subconsciously, but the more "experience" we have, the more we are able to subconsciously evaluate this information accurately. this is, IMO, what most of the recorded ESP is. our subconscious brains can recognize patterns very well and can use those patterns to predict things quite accurately.

or it could be conjoined triplets... is that possible?... is that a type of mutation?

ahh... ineresting. it seems that i am a mesomorph as well. so then it's partially genetic... i wonder if the "limit" i was talking about has more to do with muscle memory then. perhaps the brain remembered how YT's muscles were used before, allowing him to use them again in the same way. then they would grow to the size required by that level of work. as for me, i'm a teenager. i never really did any repetitions so i never really had any muscle memory... ignorance is bliss <edit> actually, i just thought of something. Freshman year of highschool i met a kid that took martial arts and had a side hobby of trying to learn martial arts arial tricks (flips and stuff). i was easily able to learn the basics in about 1/8th of the time it took him. then i tried doing harder stuff. i succesfully landed a medium level trick on my first try, but it wasnt very good. then the guy said i needed to keep doing it so that i could build up muscle memory. after he said that my tricking abilities pretty much went downhill... HIS muscles build up by slowly improving and building muscle memory one step higher each time. MY muscles build up by ignoring muscle memory and making that giant leap up to the harder trick. geez, and that fits into the rest of my life too... *gazes off into space as he ponders his epiphany...*

maybe, but i think it's also a genetic thing like how people have set weights. it's easy to gain weight up to that point, or lose weight down to that point, but it's hard to go away from that point. for example: i always stay at around 140-145lb. i haven't tried to gain weight or lose weight, but my body always tries to make me weigh that much no matter how much i eat... or eat enough no matter how much i do. also: i never strength trained a day in my life (except when it was required for a week in P.E.), yet i am relatively strong (compared to my friends).

and in organisms that have DNA, RNA is used to translate DNA into protiens