Printable View
Can't be proven, you have to get nothing to do something.Quote:
Originally posted by CornedBee
Something that does nothing is slower than nothing that does something.
You can't do that, or if you could you would be famous.
As the laws of physics states: Zero Equals Zero
Zero Point Energy, anyone?
Of course it depends how strictly you see "nothing". :)
| something
Theres something on the left, there aint anything on the right!
Okay, this is as with air IRL, theres actually SPACES there, but you know what i mean ;)
If nothing, zip, zero, nada, nothing RIGHT now creates a big bowl of candy besides me on my table, i'll eat my words. :D
No, you'll eat the candy ;)
dont tell nothing that! (or is it noone?)
:D
[voice=singsang]Shan't say nothing if you don't say please![/voice]
I think you are confusing the measurer with the measured.
case 1. (something has mass)
electron just hanging out and a photon in THE VOID.
the electron has mass and is therefore something.
The photon has no mass and is therefore nothing.
The photon moves at a speed which bounds all possible speeds
of the electron.
ergo
Something that does nothing can be slower than nothing that does something.
case 2. (if "doing" means "can be calculated", something means energy)
photon in THE VOID
those great big scissors (blades the size of the galaxy).
close the scissors.
Then the scissors are imaginary and have no energy, ergo nothing.
The photon has energy, therefore something
Well the point of contact of the blades of the scissor, moves faster
than the photon could every move.
Nothing that does something can be faster than something that does something
nothing can't do anything:
Ex nihilo nihil fit.:)
call this bold statement P1Quote:
nothing can't do anything
can we further agree that.
P2. if A does X, then X is something.
Now given P1 and P2 .
1. ~anything = nothing
2. P1 and statement 1 imply nothing does nothing.
3. P2 and statement 2 imply that nothing = something
reductio ad absurdum.
Just to be serious for a moment.
There are many examples in language where
a given formula is well formed, but has no symantic value.
The given sentence is meaningless.
e.g.
Nothing does x
Y exists. (all statements of ontology)
Y knows X (all statements of epistimology)
and the ever present combination of the above coupled with a symantic judgement.
Y knows that it is TRUE that X exists.
MEANINGLESS
:blush:Quote:
Originally posted by CornedBee
The while loop never runs, you forget to reset the index.
i probably forgot it. have u tried to test the problem WITH the initilization of i = 0; ? looks like there are differences for large numbers of iterations...