Perhaps you folks can give me a hand.Imagine a spinning gyroscope of a fixed weight.

Originally Posted by RamenNoodles GRB: Gamma Ray BurstMay I kindly have a list of planets that are similar to Earth (relative to size/composition), which have known to have been hit by X?X: an instance of a hypothetical GRB that has a high enough energy concentration that would send the human race to extinction with almost a 100% probability within several decades from impact if it hit Earth? No such list exists. My work will either be dismissed as rubbish, or it’s going to change a lot of things. Should be an interesting discussion… I got a $35 copyright so Leibniz wouldn’t steal my shit.

It’s been great. Perhaps you could ask mummy to sit next to after you post it here. (Sorry, was that patronizing? You asked for it.)Anyway, if you aren’t willing to discuss it here, can you at least tell us where we can read about it. Yes, I am both an imposter and an idiot. Perhaps you folks can give me a hand.Imagine a spinning gyroscope of a fixed weight.

Thank you. And it got me thinking: if someone found something that perhaps slumpnasty has, and its revealed, the curisoity is gone, destroyed. Originally Posted by Slumpnasty I’ve decided to make you wait, and you will undoubtedly become agitated, impatient, indignant, and skeptical.

Models show that the destructive effects of this increase can cause up to 16 times the normal levels of DNA damage. Maybe slumpnasty is doing the right thing in shielding us from his find? I mean, if he tells us, the curisoity is gone.

Symbolic logic is pretty fundamental, being more fundamental than mathmatics. Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver For the past year, perhaps more, I have had the idea of curiosity rammed this way and that around my viewing senses care of the Discover Channel. I didn’t realize the magnitude of it’s implication until recently…So have fun pulling numbers apart and scribbling on paper. lololol If you are this sensitive about people asking you to provide some details, I wonder how well you will cope with any questions or criticism of your new theorem. I “googled” The Fundamental Theorem of Logic, and couldn’t find anything.

Judging from your response, I am much relieved. Hello my fellow Eggheads! I’ve just copyrighted and formally completed my masterpiece, and I really hope nobody has beat me to the punch. Dear my little mathematical geniuses, since I have been patronized on this forum, I have decided to patronize you.

Again, thanks for your time. You have not been patronized here.Look – you open a thread saying you have discovered something fundamental, but you are not willing to tell us what that is.What is the point of that? There is nothing to discuss except your towering ego; recall this is a DISCUSSION forum.This is not patronizing, it’s “fundamental” – you are an egotist who fails to understand how this and all similar fora work. Does anybody know if there already is a “Fundamental Theorem of Logic”?

Or something like that? Anyway, the last two weeks or so have been my “intellectual Marathon,” and now my mind is shot out.Peace and love homies It’s a little possessive, right? You’ll have every Vulcan after you. A mathematics or philosophy journal? Your own web site? A self-published book? What? Or … why not just tell us?

So you have some very important theorem in some kind of logic which you will not let on any information about and you aren’t even familiar enough with the field to know if there is already a fundamental theorem in it. Observer, thanks for responding. It is a concept of psychology. In addition to being a master of deduction, I’m also a master of induction.

Are you going to tell us about this groundbreaking work of staggering genius? Or at least tell us in which mathematical journal it will be published? Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver But it’s not cool to coyright logic, you know. No, I wasn’t working on FOL.

I know that I am.PS. Does anybody know if there already is a “Fundamental Theorem of Logic”? Piaget. Did you look up symbolic logic? I have only had a introductory level course in it at the Bachelors level and that was on the order of 40 yrs ago.

Now, I offer a challenge: Tell me what should be the “Fundamental Theorem of Logic.” Certainly, as qualified logicians, you already know this. Logic is a concept of mental function according to what mental function allows. Now imagine if someone found a grand theory of everything, and destroyed our curiosity for all time, by revealing it’s nature? Wow.

For what my opinion is worth, “Sealeaf” has especially earned my respect. For the rest of you, I hope you all have productive and rewarding careers. Originally Posted by Guitarist Moderator says: If Slumpnasty is unwilling to share his “insight”, it seems this thread is a waste of space.

And your thoughts are……..? I could not agree more.But let’s keep it open a little while longer anyways, in case he changes his mind and publishes it on this thread anyway. And it got me thinking: if someone found something that perhaps slumpnasty has, and its revealed, the curisoity is gone, destroyed. Since to date, all known GRBs have occurred in galaxies other than the Milky way, and we have no way to detect planets in other galaxies, there would be no data set from which to create such a list.

It covers the fundamental theories of logic and the symbolic language used to express them. Do to my poor reception in this forum What do you expect? Walk into a party and say, “I have done something amazing!” and you will no doubts have some guests gathering around.

Originally Posted by Slumpnasty Hello my friends. It’s been great. I see. Which form of logic? FOL?

Possibly you are an idiot too, though that is hard to judge without some content from you Originally Posted by Slumpnasty I have been patronized on this forum, I have decided to patronize you. Could I ask what you think the purpose of that is? Copyright will only protect the specific written form of your idea, not the idea itself. Refuse to say what you have done, walk around with a smug smile and expect people to buy you drinks? After a while people will avoid you while muttering “twat” under their breath.The longer you hold out, the more likely people are to say, “is that it?” and laugh at you.

Originally Posted by Strange What do you expect? Walk into a party and say, “I have done something amazing!” Or let out a half drunken cheer and immediately return to what they were doing… depending on what kind of party you’re at i suppose. Anyway, don’t think too hard, it’s “fundamental” after all. Do to my poor reception in this forum, I’ve decided to make you wait, and you will undoubtedly become agitated, impatient, indignant, and skeptical.

Do to my poor reception in this forum, I’ve decided to make you wait, and you will undoubtedly become agitated, impatient, indignant, and skeptical. In addition to being a master of deduction, I’m also a master of induction. I understand your doubt and skepticism.

Immodesty is a VERY unbecoming trait. Logic itself doesn’t belong in mathematics. I thought this thread was closed, but it seems that parag1973 decided to share his insight.Anyway, to summarize my Theorem: The only Proof, is that there is NO Proof. (This is a Paradox.)The Universe is both * In-finite * and * Un-de-finite *Since the Laws of Physics are Unbreakable, this means that the Universe in its Totality is Omnipotent.Derived from my Theorem, Omniscience is a Co-Requisite to Omnipotence.This means that the Universe in its Totality, is Conscious.”Universe” “God” “Everything” “Allah”Take your pick.

Hi everyone. Originally Posted by Wikipedia All in all, a GRB within a few parsecs, with its energy directed towards Earth, will mostly damage life by raising the UV levels during the burst itself and for a few years thereafter. It’s a little possessive, right? You’ll have every Vulcan after you.

Originally Posted by Slumpnasty Hello my fellow Eggheads! I’ve just copyrighted and formally completed my masterpiece, and I really hope nobody has beat me to the punch. Well contrary to your expectations, I am pretty sure that most members here are happy to wait quite calmly for your great revelation, until Hell itself freezes over if need be.

Yes.Or perhaps he is just seriously deluded.Again, we won’t know which one until we see what he’s got Anyway, don’t think too hard, it’s “fundamental” after all. You have chosen to prove you are an idiot rather than demonstrate you have had a good idea. It is more than mere addition or subtraction. Farewell.

PPS. For the past year, perhaps more, I have had the idea of curiosity rammed this way and that around my viewing senses care of the Discover Channel. Good luck with that.[wanders off muttering...] I didn’t realize the magnitude of it’s implication until recently…So have fun pulling numbers apart and scribbling on paper. lololol it is not order that i fear but the eccentricities of human. neither do i fear chaos because there is order even there but with multitude of varibles. Maybe slumpnasty is doing the right thing in shielding us from his find?

I mean, if he tells us, the curisoity is gone. I didn’t know that. Maybe even Wittgenstein? But it’s not cool to coyright logic, you know. This thread belongs in psychology or something similar, at best. So much for my intellectual property worries ;>> That’s pretty tough. That’s OK, you can’t copyright (or patent) an idea.

I think he’s proving it to be “everyone enjoys a laugh”, right? These words all mean the same thing. Still, that’s your choice. And your thoughts are……..? If you wish, I will send you my work.

If all the energy (of the GRB described in the above quote) was converted to matter, roughly how much mass would it be expected to have? However, you all (indirectly) provided the answer I was searching for. That’s pretty tough. I got a $35 copyright so Leibniz wouldn’t steal my shit.

Now imagine if someone found a grand theory of everything, and destroyed our curiosity for all time, by revealing it’s nature? Wow. If Slumpnasty is for real, he should be able to state “The Fundamental Theorem of Logic”.

I am still minded to lock this shite – have your fun with this wanker for another day, and ’twill be done Originally Posted by Slumpnasty Hello my friends. Yes, undoubtedly so… Does anybody know if there already is a “Fundamental Theorem of Logic”? Or something like that? Anyway, the last two weeks or so have been my “intellectual Marathon,” and now my mind is shot out.

If not, I would like you to refer me to someone else. Hello my friends. Now, I offer a challenge: Tell me what should be the “Fundamental Theorem of Logic.” Certainly, as qualified logicians, you already know this.

Originally Posted by Slumpnasty I thought this thread was closed, Well it is now, thanks to your latest burst of madness. Originally Posted by Slumpnasty Dear my little mathematical geniuses, since I have been patronized on this forum, I have decided to patronize you. Maybe you can outwit the psychology section? I got media and crime essay
a $35 copyright so Leibniz wouldn’t steal my shit. Related Discussions:You May Now Divide by 0.The Theory of EverythingWhat is the significance of the Riemann Hypothesis?Parallel axis or HuygensA?Steiner theoremTry this, tough guys!Pythagoran theoremEvidenceWhat boolean operation will suit this need in C++?Something else than binary logic?Find Something wrong on a Theorem Originally Posted by Slumpnasty I’ve just copyrighted and formally completed my masterpiece, and I really hope nobody has beat me to the punch. If someone else knows about your idea (if you ever lower yourself to reveal it to the benighted peasantry) and they choose to write thir own book on it, you can’t stop them. This is my first post so hopefully I’ll do it right!I have two questions that have been in my head for a while but I cant quite get through the math to figure it out. Moderator says: If Slumpnasty is unwilling to share his “insight”, it seems this thread is a waste of space.

It also doesn’t prove that you invented the idea. Phew.

This entry was posted in EssayHelpForHire. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>