Intellectual betterment.
- Thread starter Maggot
- Start date
sorry the macro func is broken on me point an shoot! I will be sure to include a good pic with my chopper when I send it up
Please don't, I'll be opening that up.
How many 99 storey buildings do you know that are a few feet tall and not located in moomin-land?
Cool another episode of the: Jonathan D, EmmaD and Southey show....
Don't worry, Wednesday will be here soon, and the second episode of The Code. Personally, I can't wait
One test. They will both remain intact when falling from the top floor. They will however splat when the are no longer falling and hit the ground
Yay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
At the risk of starting another DISCUSSION, the question was what happend when they fall not when they hit the ground, so Mr Trunks is the first right ans so far I guess?
the question has nothing to do with the fact an egg is extremely fragile, it is more to do with the testing method to prove, as in if you had no idea what an egg was, but wanted to test what hieghts it would break from, how many times might you have to do it, therefore the answer is 50 tests, if you drop the egg from every other floor and it does not break then in 49 tests you will get to floor 98 and then obviously you will have to drop it from floor 99, making it 50 seperate tests, however if it breaks on any floor, lets say 24, then you know it cant survive a fall from that hieght but can from floor 22, so you would drop the second egg from floor 23, and if breaks or doesnt break you will know exactly which floor is the maximum it can be dropped from,
the test is flawed though, as it assumes that each drop will not weaken the egg unless it breaks it, which it would, plus it assumes that all eggs are completely identical which they are not, plus i think you might have meant to say most number of tests not least, as you would need anything from 1 to 50 tests to know exactly how many, but you wouldnt neccessarily know from one, even though you would cause its an egg, but thats common sense, not scientific method
Last edited:
When a person for the first time is introduced to new knowledge they can react in primarily two ways:
1: They can study the subject until they have reached a sufficient understanding of the subject in regard to the operational perspective of that particular piece of knowledge. This will generally mean that the person is developing his cognitive abilities and extending his knowledgebase.
2: They can instead chose intellectual laziness, combined with a feeling of being wronged because other persons actually has come to a better understanding of a particular subject than themselves. This most often results in cognitive stillstand and leaves the person in continuing frustration.
Clearly option number 1 is most preferably.
Which is why I don't understand why any of Emma's postings in any way could be construed as "big-headed" or otherwise negative, when the postings actually are factually enlightening a otherwise quite uninspired discussion.
If you really want to get your head bewildered around matematics you should try some of Gödels writings.....
Pax Et Bonum!
//Kim Horsevad
One test. They will both remain intact when falling from the top floor. They will however splat when the are no longer falling and hit the ground
I suppose if you are being scientific about it, you would need to perform two tests. The second to prove the results of the first...
Kim,
I think the initial posts by Emma... Such as..
Are the ones being construed as 'big headed'. Anyhow folks for the most part have 'kissed and made up' and were now in post 'car crash' mode extracting the urine from each other.
When posting on a forum you need to understand the dynamic of the forum what is and is not acceptable to the majority members. Levels of acceptability vary from forum to forum and you need to get a feel where the forum is operating and what the dynamic is.
What's good here on BCUK, may not be on BCL for example or vice versa.
Generally on BCUK from my limited experience it's not really that acceptable to put someone down by directly saying I know more than you because I'm superior in some way. You may draw the conclusion from the exchange above that's exactly what was happening.
Any how as I said folk have appologised and the issue is in the grand scale of things less than 1% significant.
However We all love a thread where there is a dust up it's the Forum equivalant of Rubbernecking an accident on the motorway...
Cheers
John
Thanks for the reply and the explanation!
However, I still can't quite grasp why these comments should be construed as insulting or as putting someone down - for me it is a quite rational and factbased reply.
If a person feels "put down" or insulted because he happens to read a couple of words he cannot fully grasp, then I would suggest that the fault is with the person feeling such and not with the knowledgable person.
And I still can't understand why there is anything wrong in factually stating that you are quite good at something.
Indeed, one should cherish the moments where one happen to meet a more knowledgeable person than oneself - this gives a moment of opportunity for continually learning and expanding ones knowledgebase and skills.
//Kim Horsevad
PS: I actually learnt a new word from you post. I am Danish and my accuaintance with the english language is mostly from reading research litterature - as such the term "rubbernecking" was new for me. Google is a powerful friend indeed!
