Re: [lace-chat] Re: :) Fwd: proof that girls are evil (fwd)

2004-05-18 Thread Weronika Patena
 My objection is to the first x, which *should have been* a +... I quote 
 from the site:
 First we state that girls that girls require time *and* money. 
 Girls=Time x Money.
 
 Last I heard, and  meant plus, not times. So, time and money 
 should have been written out as Time + Money.  The rest of the 
 proof falls flat on its face because, as Robin Panza said (she's not 
 on chat, sent the message privately):

Actually in math and is times and or is plus.

 The quote 'Money is the root of all evil' is incorrect, if that helps. 
 The
 actual quote says that 'the love of money is the root of all evil'

I don't know, I always heard the version without love. 

 Weronika Patena (a student at Cal Tech) wrote:
 
 Not refutable, other than the absolute value comment someone already
 added on the same page.  Which, by the way, means that either girls =
 evil or girls = -evil, so it's not that bad g
 
 And Liz Beecher wrote:
 
 Being a mathematician - I am sorry to say that the mathematical 
 equations are
 absolutely correct and that it does appear that I am evil.
 
 Seems to me, if you include my own objection to a wrong sign being 
 used, it's:
 Language Arts: 3, Mathematics: 0.  g Robin, who spotted the mistake 
 in translation (from English to math language), is a scientist 
 herself, but of the generation somewhat closer to me in age than either 
 Liz or Weronika. I am a little disturbed that the young ones are so 
 careless of context, so willing to focus narrowly...

Math will do that to you g.

 Robin throws in another interesting equation (philosophical, this 
 time g):
 
 [...] anything we value requires time and money, so everything of 
 value is evil.

Of course g

Weronika

To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace-chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [lace-chat] Re: :) Fwd: proof that girls are evil (fwd)

2004-05-18 Thread Weronika Patena
 Actually in math and is times and or is plus.
 
 In my school days (40+ yrs ago), and was +, times was x, and or, 
 being very indefinite, belonged not to mathemathics, but to philosophy 
 (and to history, and to daily budgeting g)

Ah, right, I didn't go to school in the US, so I missed this one.  But
in math fields like logic and is multiplication and or is addition, because 1 or 
0 is 1 just like 1+0, and both 1 and 0 and 1*0 are 0. 

 I don't know, I always heard the version without love.
 
 Very few of us read The right stuff at all, much less read it 
 carefully these days; we're in too much of a hurry... I myself knew the 
 original quote, but didn't think to question the one supplied, as 
 that's the one in common circulation

I must say the original version makes much more sense than the common
one.  There's nothing wrong with money, really.  You can buy bobbins
with it g.

Weronika

To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace-chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]