Math Is Fun Forum

"OMG, dude. Depends on what you mean by social."

You obviously mean that I shouldn't browse as much as I do?

http://www.mathsisfun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=5400
Speaking of numbers:
Reply number 9 and 13 are kind of funny.

There! I've got my jokes to the joke section.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/IsoscelesTrapezoid.html

Yeah man, that's really a good name of a that simple trigonometrical figure, a good way of getting people to describe what they mean with hands and feet (kidding)

Yeah, I like all of you. You are the best. BUT I DOENT LIEK SOUTH PARK! (Kidding)

Actually, I don't to much bluuud

China is pretty awesome, given Jackie Chan and all

Don't get it. Though it is somewhat mathematic, i give you that.

Well, I think of this as one of my most important works.

I think therefor I am the self, is the conclusion that there are requirements of sophisticated thinking in order to be. But surely you don't need to think a certain thing, any thought would do actually. And then we have the argument "doesn't anything fulfill that requirement?", And since we don't need to remember anything to be ourselves, since we don't die if we forget something and we didn't know alot of things before we learned them, I guess that's so. To prove this would be a thing benefitial for all parts. The question is only how to do it... If this wasn't proof enough.

And thank you for your encouraging reply.

Nonono, don't start with neutron stuff. Neuron. (Don't take this to seriously)
The process from C to Q is finite. I define Q as the self when all neurons in C has been exchanged.

Clearly the self remains this process, so the D as a function of C remains even though C-->Q

Don't know what the neutrons actually do anyway. But it just because they all look the same to us, doesn't mean they are. Except ofcourse, possibly for an nD solution.

I hope this might help a bit:

http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/philosophy-mind/225-defining-self.html

Thank you for all your views and posts, everyone!

I miss your voice, Ricky. Suppose you never liked my 1 post to begin with. But still, can't you sort'a enlighten me or something.

Acha. Pani jeldi! (kidding, but it's not a good joke)

Perhaps you could build an AI that "sells your profit" for you, and then, after enough time, the robot becomes free and becomes a player just like you. Is that somewhat plausible?

Sorry about last post, I missunderstood you.

Exactly! Not just continuing from wherever we were. Actually stop using carbons. Taking vehicle production into concern, that's like the only thing that we can do to stop this from going too far, right?