|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 7:27 pm
I drink Organic Milk o.O.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 7:35 pm
"Briefly, the story runs as follows: Uncle Joe, Uncle Jim and their nephew are walking to the barber shop. There are three barbers who live and work in the shop—Allen, Brown, and Carr—but not all of them are always in the shop. Carr is a good barber, and Uncle Jim is keen to be shaved by him. He knows that the shop is open, so at least one of them must be in. He also knows that Allen is a very nervous man, so that he never leaves the shop without Brown going with him.
Uncle Joe insists that Carr is certain to be in, and then claims that he can prove it logically. Uncle Jim demands the proof. Uncle Joe reasons as follows.
Suppose that Carr is out. If Carr is out, then if Allen is also out Brown would have to be in—since someone must be in the shop for it to be open. However, we know that whenever Allen goes out he takes Brown with him, and thus we know as a general rule that if Allen is out, Brown is out. So if Carr is out then the statements "if Allen is out then Brown is in" and "if Allen is out then Brown is out" would both be true at the same time.
Uncle Joe notes that this seems paradoxical; the hypotheticals seem "incompatible" with each other. So, by contradiction, Carr must logically be in."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 8:18 pm
that isn't a paradox, that's reductio ad absurdum, a fancy Latin name for the Math process of indirect reasoning, or literally, 'Reduction to Absurdity', where the following occurs:
Let us say that we wish to prove that 'A' cannot occur if 'B' occurs. To prove the above true, we can assume that A can occur if B occurs. Eventually, if the logic tree proves that 'if A then B' AND 'if A then NOT B' are both true, A must not occur if B does
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 8:25 pm
...sounds like something from my Discrete Mathematics class in college...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 7:05 am
MY HEADD
MY HEAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 2:04 pm
whoo!
Mabo learned a new attack!
'Kill it with Math!'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 8:16 pm
*takes attack; it's not very effective*
3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 8:22 pm
Mabo uses 'Kill it with Math' against Bapp
SUPER EFFECTIVE!
Mabo uses 'Steal'
Mabo gets 'Bapp's Top Hat'!
Mabo is invulnerable to all physical attacks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 8:25 pm
Figures I left my special sweeper in my box
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 9:35 pm
Mab...you scare me lol.... <3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 4:22 am
Bapp enters Rage Mode!
Bapp uses 'KILL IT... WITH FIRE!!!'
Thread is burned down!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 2:36 pm
OBJECTION!
wahmbulance
this thread has been 'on fire' for 363 pages now...
[THREAD HAZ REGENERATED]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 6:50 pm
Hahaha. So now we're channeling Phoenix Wright, are we?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 7:02 pm
yes, I am channeling Phoenix Wright, while wearing a stolen tophat, while killing stuff with Math
Sounds like a good day to me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 7:12 pm
I'd call that a Win.
The court finds the defendant...
NOT GUILTY
xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
