Sayonara

I don't think the geology section is as regularly visited as the others. I checked it out but got a 404.

How should I know? I'm not using it precisely for reasons like this one. The bandwidth sequestering, terms in the EULA, and the nasties in SP1 were more than enough to put me off. Don't you people read the IT news?

Nothing below WinXP has ever gone further than alerting you to new updates.

I can't find the book anywhere. :-/

Can only be sustained if the probability of all events occurring AND failing to occur is 100%, which in turn can only be sustained where at least one infinite operational environment exists - whether this is via multiverses, alternate timelines, parallel universes, infinite spacetime... take your pick. If you look above you'll see that I did come up with some imaginings. According to your post, they must be manifest at some point in space or time. But it doesn't explain why. Therefore it's more of a statement than a theory.

Like T_FLeX said, people who use "Einstein Wrong!!!!" as their header or title are just attention seeking. Many such people are actually so ignorant of Einstein that they don't know he made some absolutely hooting great errors and was the first to admit it, proving himself wrong. They seem to think science is about being able to say "I'm right and you're wrong", or "I know something you don't know", rather than just understanding all the STUFF that goes on around us. It's the whole pathetic, angsty "consume your betters" human underachievement supercompensation thing.

My housemate discovered on monday that his copy of XP was automatically connecting to the M$ megathingy and updating itself without his knowledge. He firewalled http://www.microsoft.com, which amused me greatly seeing as everything to do with updates and checking goes through windowsupdate.microsoft.com. Go go magic 2K/Linux dual boots!

If SARS was caused intentionally to reduce the population, then the people in charge of the operation must be absolute morons. 2000 people out of a billion is negligible. Off the top of my head I can think of about 100 faster and more effective ways to reduce the population in China without damaging the infrastructure or economy.

Would you like some dancing bananas?

Took you long enough I am just leaving work. The camera is at home.

A good thing too. If it wasn't, I wouldn't know if they had cats in there or not.

I'm off to the pseudoscience forum to start a thread about how the outbreak in Toronto is evidence enough that China actually are annexing Canada.

I can prove that my butt is not capacious enough to accomodate any number of badgers and stilts, and I can prove that badgers have neither the dexterity, balance, co-ordination or morphology required to use stilts. Therefore I can safely stop there. Just like I can be no less than 100% certain that a giant banana will not be responsible for dooming the galaxy, houses will never live inside people, and the ground will always be beneath the sky. To quote, click the 'quote' button. Or use the [ quote] tag.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY

You're going to have to do better than that. Don't forget than in actual physical realities, triggering a paradox is just as difficult as resolving a paradox (in temporal terms both events are the same as the direction is meaningless). In any case I don't see what paradoxes have to do with parallel universes or near-infinite possibility systems.

You guys do know there's an outbreak in Canada too, right? Or was Canada annexed and I didn't notice...?

Get back to General Discussions you.

You could have told me that a week ago. Poor tiddles

"I didn't know the moon appears red during full lunar eclipse therefore any wild theory explaining it away as something bizarre that more than one webshite has mentioned will do for me." Idiot

You're talking about making a generalist species. There are thousands of generalist ant species already.

If you were trying to predict all the possible but logical outcomes of timeframe X after period Y, yes. If you were to use a pre-destination paradox as your starting point and work backwards to timeframe X then you would already have a computational constraint based on the outcome of the paradox, which would still allow for computation of alternations but would keep them in the realm of the 'not ludicrous' by providing probabilistic outcome targets for your software.

Not so. "Badgers on stilts will never walk out of my butt." There we go, proof.

Oh. What shall we do now then?

GODDAMITSCRIPTHUGGINGHIPPIES Ha! :banana: