The Reborn Devil

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/2110198-post740.html

Replies:

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/2110221-post741.html
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/2110222-post742.html

You mad AbysmalKitteh?!?!?!//1/1/111111

Reputation (+4):
(Post) Oh my lanta

Reputation (+1):
(Post) Helpful data!

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/map-development-202/wow-destruction-azeroth-207693/

That's good to know and do you like the project I'm working on?

I just got to say I don't like the Hitler guy either and I'm Canadian.
Am I still in trouble?

Sorry for doing that.
Removed the pic.

what the meaning of "♥ enjoy ♥"?
Are you love her?

Your pic is scary

Reputation (+2):
(Post) (+2) 1337.

Reputation (+4):
(Post) jea bro

filthy degenerate.

Reputation (--10):
(Post) Shame on you, asking for rep I thought you loved me more than this! ):

thx for the reeeepz <3

Reputation:
(Post) Grr! [15-23-32] The Reborn Devil: GIVE ME REP

Reputation (+1):
(Post) Whooo!! Yeah!!! Thank you TRD!

awesome avatar!

Reputation (+1):
(Post) what game?

Send me them Tricky pictures. Oh, and incidentally:

----------
Lavest snitt inntekt etter postnummer (fra VG)
0445Oslo
57 961
----------
Ser den, det er Bjølsen studentby. xD

You should totally not have your name changed to The Abysmal Kitteh. With spaces, no, underscores!

Anyway.. http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/off-topic-478/discuss-film-tv-series-ratings-recommendations-206976/index4.html#post2078368

What films did I forget? :3

Edit: Fuck you editor.

Namechange?

y u get name change kitteh

Reputation (+2):
(Post) fucking awesome

As promised, within I explain everything formally required to understand a nice, formal proof of 0.99... = 1. This is the absolute best I can do to convince you. It might take a little bit of work to understand some of the stuff I say, so please don't just glaze over it. If you do not believe this, then you are beyond helping:
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/pastebin.php?id=n6qtf4

Reputation (+1):
(Post) Merry Christmas

The
Reborn
Devil

Reputation (+2):
(Post) You play LoL! What about joining the social group for LoL players?

Look what I found!
http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz60/jk-hillestad/Personal%20Creativity/Miscellaneous/currentdesktop012010.jpg?t=1263054531

Do you has that picture? I think I've lost all my pictures. ;_______;

So anyway, I got it working with Sansui and Hakeem's help. Now I need you to change that Java program you made for me a while back so that it resizes to a height of 100px, and keeps the ratio. Make it in Java, because Norton doesn't like your .EXE files. :3

You look like me c:

Wai u no werk? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15191861/web/index.html

Hey there.

Thanks... I guess. D:

Y u choco?

Reputation (+1):
(Post) Merry Christmas for you, too.

Reputation (+4):
(Post) Hehe

You're completely oblivious to the fact you'd have to wait until 9th of March to get Skyrim if you ordered them together, though? Because Skyrim was released today if I am not mistaken. And dude, chill, you don't need Skyrim before it's under 200.

Oh, and I'm absolutely LOVIN' that user title.

Derp Religion is a science, its the science of faith. And derpy much more derp they had science back from over 4000 years ago. With philosophy. Derpy, and near the beggining of our existance there was when we started to invent things like Spears, and Spear throwers. Etc this was all engineering science. Just because it we didn't name it or fully comprehend it. We still partook in the scientificul observation of MAn Throw spear, Spear hit Animal, Animal dead now, Man has food !

Cantor's theorem allows for that.

I'm sorry but you refuse to accept documented formal mathematics. I can't argue with you. I can, however, refer you to some reliable sources which will confirm what I'm saying. You cannot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinality#Finite.2C_countable_and_uncountable_sets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantor%27s_diagonal_argument#Real_numbers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity#Cardinality_of_the_continuum

Also, I hope you're aware that the Upanishads are a bunch of Hindu religious texts. Why you are bringing this up is beyond me, and has nothing to do with formal math.

In your argument about Infinity with hindy hat. If you go and research it, actually infinity has different sizes. This was proven by the Bus+Hotel puzzle. Which used alot of infinity
http://www.mathacademy.com/pr/minitext/infinity/
Basically the idea shown. xD Of how to count an infinity in short terms you counter to a finite and equalise them then that shows teh size of the infinity xD

The creation of fire is classed as science due it being there. Although we didn't know what it was from the beggining we had theories. Including it as an element or as a god creating it there. Modern science is just refined old science with better ideas etc. We knew what fruit to eat through observation. BAd fruit=Ill/death this was then communicated through out tribes over the world or in that area. And passed down. Again this is science, mental science as well as observational science.

Herp Derp try again>

Everything is science xD, abstract thought is science. Just because we have no real explanation does not mean its nots scientific we just haven't thought of it yet or concluded. As there are theories.

xD

I don't know why you believe that the set of naturals is finite. If it's finite, then there is a largest natural number N. If n is natural, then n+1 is natural. So N+1 is natural too, which is impossible since N is the largest natural number. That should be enough to say that the set of naturals is infinite.

The set of naturals is {1, 2, 3, 4, ...}. The set of squares of naturals is {1, 4, 9, 16, ...}. You are talking about associating the set of naturals with the set of square roots of naturals, {1, sqrt(2), sqrt(3), ...}, and this also works too. Nowhere is it required that sqrt(n) be a natural number. All you need is an association n <-> sqrt(n).

I'm not trying to avoid the question. I just don't know what you're getting at.
I'm not sure what the question is about the length of the line. Do you want me to say that it's infinite? Of course it's infinite, since the size of the naturals is infinite. Adding the reals makes the line infinitely longer (this is not obvious).

Reply is in pastebin since it's too long for a VM: http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/pastebin.php?id=5rfa86

The process by which we created machines and determined how they work strive of science. As does all knowledge which we pertain. As it is some type of Science. Physics the way the world works. Biology the way organisms work, and Chemistry how Chemicals work xD. And this all interfuses with sub sets like Physcology stemming of biology etc etc.

The point is all knowledge stems from science and its related subset categories.
Therefore we built machines with science. Yet i have already stated how science is faith and not proven due to it being percieved not fact. So therefore information attained from science or mechines which are meant to give more accurate clearer results, are all still stemming from bias human perceptions

. So the only way of refining this with such machines is just bringing us closer to the "human perception on logic"> As everything used to measure something and everything we have built, is built in our perception. As in its built wrongly due to science dictating the way it should be built.

So therefore with that Camera's are a refined view of the human perception, or Human logic and are therefore not a truth.

In a 3rd argument is that camera's have limited accuracy, and pictures of things may seem different to what they actually are. They dont give the whole story. this is with any measurement. The only way for something to give a full story is for us to measure everything, and no everything, a completly controlled experiment. But that is almost impossible xD. Due to the Uncertainty principle, so hey science dissproves itself xD

Arguing that science is not proven using science. xD

The image given from a camera is effectively the same as the eye see's , sometimes better quallity sometimes lesser quallity. My point is in an anallergy. We see the world what we call "in focus" now if that camera was out of focus. It would be wrong what we see and blurred. But to a different consiousness thats how they would always see.

They way we see is built on Human logic hence even the need of a lens. Its like that annalaergy i just gave but much more extreme. And much more univsersal/Macroscopic.

xD

Also as another easilly achieved counter argument the camera may simply produce random dots. But within those dots depending on different perceptions> Different images reveal themselves. Again this can be shown with simple illusion tricks. As we have no way of knowing what is and what isn't an image without percieving it first as we cannot observe without the intereference of our perception.

Reputation (+1):
(Post) Useful info, thank you!