Caltrops - Reviews





	[quote name="Entropy Stew"][quote name="Zseni"][quote name="Entropy Stew"]Here you go overcomplicating and obfuscating things as usual. Curst's original statement becomes accurate when one looks at it in a boolean or set theoretical context. Observe: boring ∧ SUPPLY ZONES!!!!!!!! = boring Now, what does this remind you of? Slash fiction? Close! [quote cite="The Identity Law states"]<i>A</i> ∨ 0 = <i>A</i> <i>A</i> ∧ 1 = <i>A</i>[/quote] Given Kohan as empirical evidence, I think we can safely assume that SUPPLY ZONES!!!!!!!! is true. -/ES/-[/quote] Man wtf, I read all these replies and all I figured out is that you shitshoes are miserable mathematicians and criminally short on curiosity to boot. I just wanted to make Hayt's defective short-bus math cyclops happy again and y'all jump my ass for it like I'm wearing a saddle. Specifically in your case, ES, whatever that fuckin symbol is doesn't show up on several browsers on either of my OSes, but you're doing curst a disservice by insisting he meant to write his equation with your symbols. The group/ring theory theory has the plusses of cheering a cyclops and giving curst the benefit of the doubt on formal mathematical notation. It's a win-win proposition that preserves the intent of the original joke-equation - that adding supply zones to Kohan didn't make it any more interesting - at least as well as your little deviation. A blanket STFU FAGS to everyone who replied. Hayt made a truly retarded post and my enlightening parody of it was both more edifying and more humorous than the original, but this wouldn't be the first time I've spilled my pearls into your piggy trough.[/quote] Your math? Sucks. Your browser? Sucks. Your comedic abilty? Sucks. [quote cite="<a href="http://www.math.niu.edu/~rusin/known-math/index/beginners.html">http://www.math.niu.edu/~rusin/known-math/index/beginners.html</a>"]Logic and set theory These areas consider the framework in which mathematics itself is carried out. To the extent that this considers the nature of proof and of mathematical reality, it borders on philosophy. But standard mathematical perspectives are used in most topics covered in the MSC. ... Commutative rings are sets like the set of integers, allowing addition and multiplication. Of particular interest are several classes of rings of interest in number theory, field theory, and related areas; however, other classes of rings arise, and a rich structure theory arises to analyze commutative rings in general, using the concepts of ideals, localizations, and homological algebra.[/quote] [quote name="Entropy Stew, upthread,"]<b>Here you go overcomplicating and obfuscating things as usual. Curst's original statement becomes accurate when one looks at it in a boolean or set theoretical context.</b>[/quote] Your algebra? Homological. -/ES/-[/quote]