PDA

View Full Version : funny proof



gavwvin
2005-Jan-08, 01:52 PM
I thought this was very funny... mathematical proof that girls are evil :

First we start by stating that girls require time and money:

girls=time x money

and we all know that time is money:

time=money
=> girls=money^2

As
money = sqrt(evil)

=> money^2=evil

=> girls=evil

:)

damienpaul
2005-Jan-08, 01:57 PM
that is classic!!! explains my ex precisely!

imported_Selene
2005-Jan-08, 04:19 PM
O.K. Maybe you´re right. But how boring the world would be without us! And what would boys do without girls? :rolleyes:

StarLab
2005-Jan-08, 06:25 PM
Good point. Without the ladies, who would feed us? :o :ph34r:

Chook
2005-Jan-08, 06:37 PM
... or cut the wood in the Winter. :D

imported_Selene
2005-Jan-08, 08:36 PM
Typical boys! Still thinking only of food and still lazy! I don´t want to imagine how would the world seems like if there weren´t girls. But on the other side I have to admit that there are some exceptions among you! :)

StarLab
2005-Jan-08, 09:41 PM
Well, you have to admit most men are exceptional backyard BBQ grillers.

rahuldandekar
2005-Jan-09, 09:53 AM
OK, I know this is a topic for proof that girls are evil, but here's another funny proof I found:

PROOF of why SCIENTISTS are POOR .

We start with two baic axioms:
1) Time is Money. 2) Knowledge is power.
Now, Power = work/time .
So, Time = work/power .

From the axioms,
Money = work/knowledge.

So, Money is inversely proportional to knowledge, irrespective of how much you work.

kashi
2005-Jan-09, 12:04 PM
Nice work gavwvin!

gavwvin
2005-Jan-09, 09:48 PM
PROOF of why SCIENTISTS are POOR

LOL Yeah I remember seeing that one.

Money=Work/Knowledge implies that for a constant value of work, as knowledge tends toward zero money tends to infinite. :D

antoniseb
2005-Jan-09, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by Selene@Jan 8 2005, 04:19 PM
what would boys do without girls?
Hi Selene,

It is certainly not the casa that girls are evil, and it takes little effort to deconstruct the proof to show it doesn't work, and as to your greater point, without girls, boys would continue doing what boys do when they are younger, but later men without women, would be a pointless downward spiral.

As a side note, I recall a "proof" from the early days of astronomy when getting an answer to within a power of ten was considered good enough:

11! = 11 * 10! [eleven factorial = eleven times ten factorial]

11!/! = 11 * 10!/!

11 = 11 * 10

11/11 = 11*10/11

therefor:

1 = 10

Chook
2005-Jan-09, 11:29 PM
A FORD is better than a ROLLS ROYCE:

Proof:
1. A FORD is better than nothing;
2. Nothing is better than a ROLLS ROYCE;
... therefore "A Ford is better than a Rolls Royce".

:blink:

gavwvin
2005-Jan-10, 10:27 AM
x=1, y=1:

x=y
x^2=xy
x^2-y^2=xy-y^2
(x+y)(x-y)=y(x-y)
x+y=y

=> 2=1

You can't fault it until you put the numbers in stage by stage... and you realise why your maths teacher told you not to divide out by factors!

antoniseb
2005-Jan-10, 02:07 PM
I remembere that one.

Originally posted by gavwvin@Jan 10 2005, 10:27 AM
x=1, y=1:
(x+y)(x-y)=y(x-y)

The above statement is true, only because x=y and (x-y)=0.

ChromeStar
2005-Jan-10, 06:52 PM
So why is this true?


x+y=y

antoniseb
2005-Jan-10, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by ChromeStar@Jan 10 2005, 06:52 PM
So why is this true?

x+y=y
That is the first line after the division by zero (i.e. x-y), so it isn't true.

ChromeStar
2005-Jan-10, 07:08 PM
Few :o it thought i might be going a bit mad :D