Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
>
> On Fri, July 8, 2005 8:45 pm, Cybe R. Wizard said:
> >>
> > Yes, that makes perfect sense and reiterates what I have said; that if a
> > thing has dropped in price 2000-fold /someone/ should now be paying me
> > to use their hardware. Isn't it similar to the problem in saying that
> > something costs, say, three times less than <time ago>? Isn't
> > /one/ time less than what was paid equal to zero? Wouldn't we be more
> > correct in saying one third the price?
> >
> > Cybe R. Wizard -wants to understand, not just pedantic
>
> Following these statements and math, one is always dividing, not
> subtracting. No matter how many times you divide you are still left with
> parts. If you then call each of the new parts a whole and divide it you
> never end up with 0 or less then 0. Unless you divide by 0, but of course
> that is an imaginary number (i).
i=sqrt(-1). If 4 feet from bar. Divide by 2 = 2 feet from bar. ...
never reach bar :-(.
--
Chris.
======
Reproduction if desired may be handled locally. -- rfc3
Reply to: