Search results

The notion of omnipotence is flawed. Can an omnipotent being create a rock which is impossible to lift by an omnipotent being? Or create a task which an omnipotent being cannot solve?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein%27s_religious_views Also get on topic. This isn't about whether einstein was religious or not.

OMGOD, This is totally the same proof for my belief that universe was started by a flying unicorn who shoots towers of fire out of its anus. Thankyou so much

But if there is a reincarnation cycle, how can the population be rising?

AL-RIGHTY HERE GOES ALL MY KNOWLEDGE OF COSMOLOGY AND PHYSICS. The big bang model is a consequence what we observe in the current universe; the universe is expanding and it seems it has been doing so for some time but it has finite size. Therefore the universe began, or was at some stage in the...

This is a lot of working for a relatively easy question. The locus of z is a circle centre 0,0 and radius 2. The locus of bz is a circle centre 0,0 with radius of 2b. The value of a shifts this circle in the real axis. So we have the locus of a+bz with radius 2b and centre at (-a,0) its late so...

I know, its obvious to anyone who watches it that she isn't being serious in the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsOXvQn3JuE&list=UUOGeU-1Fig3rrDjhm9Zs_wg&index=2&feature=plcp

This is the same problem i ran into.

Re: 2012 HSC MX2 Marathon So what your saying is that it only definitely converges for Re(s)>1 but can converge for values less than or equal to one depending on the imaginary part? In this case it can converge but only for specific values of Im(s)<1 ?

Both statements are correct if a,b,c and d are zero. Neither if a,b and c are but is not.

Re: 2012 HSC MX2 Marathon I don't want to make a thread about this as i could just ask it here. How can a complex function that converges for Re(z)>s where s is a real number have a zero for Re(z)<s. I don't understand the logic and was wondering if the initial statement of convergence must be...

Do you mean a,b,c and d? If you didn't then no as the Polynomial is just P(x)=d which is has a y value of d no matter what the value of x is. However, for the case where all the coefficients are equal to zero, P(x) is the zero polynomial which technically cuts the x axis infinitely and for all...

The first is definitely correct! From our examination of polynomials we know that the limit as x approaches positive or negative infinity is ax^3. So we have a change is sign from positive to negative and hence at least one real root! The second is also correct but its harder to explain why. But...

Wait mine or theirs?

okay guys, when I first saw this I was dumbfounded but now I know its proof that all the mathematics we know is WRONG! okay so suppose: x=y then xy=y^2 xy-x^2=y^2-x^2 x(y-x)=(y-x)(y+x) x=y+x but x=y so x=2x and 1=2!

There is still time. It isn't in general in a second.

APRIL FOOLS! even though no one fell for it :(

okay guys, when I first saw this I was dumbfounded but now I know its proof that all the mathematics we know is WRONG! okay so suppose: x=y then xy=y^2 xy-x^2=y^2-x^2 x(y-x)=(y-x)(y+x) x=y+x but x=y so x=2x and 1=2!

rational numbers are numbers that be written as a/b where a and b are integers.