Recommended Posts

There is a logic gap in the proof. As the first step "women require time and money," one uses "women = time * money." Two assumptions are made here: first, that "=" means "requires" and not "is/are." The second is that "time and money," means "time * money," and not "time + money." I would be more inclined to use the second definition of "time and money," but let's go on assuming the first one is true. Then, one ends up with "women = evil." By our previous definitions, this means that "women require evil," not "women are evil." This is our first logic gap.

Our second one is assuming that "and" means "*" I believe that it really means "+," as multiplying makes no sense. It makes more sense to me because generally, when someone says something like "what is 2 and 2," one means "what is 2 + 2" and not "what is 2*2." One only takes an "and" to mean "*" in probability, which this is not. This would mean that the end result is "women = 2 * money," and then "women = 2 * sqrt (evil) " which therefore means that "women require twice the square root of evil." Don't ask me what this means, but it's the solution under a different, and to me more logical, assumption.

Anyway, in conclusion, even using the proof presented here and assuming that the math is valid, "women = evil" means that "women require evil," meaning that everyone who is willing to look after a woman is evil! :p

thanks for killing the joke, lame ass!

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time.

So we need to know the rate that women are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving.

I think that we can safely assume that once a woman gets to Hell, she will not leave.

Therefore, no women are leaving.

As for how many women are entering Hell, as stated above all women are evil thus they all go to hell.

With birth and death rates as they are we can expect the number of women in Hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as women are added.

If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which women enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose and women take over the earth.

Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of women in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over so women can chill out.

You are assuming that women act like ideal gas molecules, that the temperature and number of women inside hell are constant, and that the "edge" of hell is completely elastic and so will expand without limit, if you want to apply Boyle's Law. I think that you are misapplying Boyle's Law, which states that P1*V1=P2*V2. You might want the combined gas law, which states P1*V1/(T1*n1)=P2*V2/(T2*n2), where P=pressure, V=volume, T=temperature, and n=number of gas molecules. In this case, if you want to eliminate pressure (since we are apparently assuming that the "edge" of Hell is completely elastic and so will expand as more women enter), then you are stating that V1/n1 must equal V2/n2 for the temperature in Hell to be constant.

However, you apparently assume, later in your post, that Hell also has its own "cosmological constant," to borrow a term from astrophysics, and will expand based on another force than the pressure of the women molecules pushing against the "edge" of hell. If so, then you throw the combined gas law out the window, and have to look at whether the ratio of women : volume is increasing or decreasing based on the rate of expansion of Hell. If it is increasing, then by T1*n1=T2*n2, the temperature must go up as well, assuming that we are looking at Hell at one particular volume. If the ratio is decreasing, then the temperature must go down.

Your logic is a bit shaky, and I had to interpret a lot of what you said, but I suppose you could make that conclusion based on some assumptions, and assuming that Hell really has a cosmological constant and its edges are completely non-elastic (women bumping into them won't cause Hell to expand).

Anyway, in conclusion, even using the proof presented here and assuming that the math is valid, "women = evil" means that "women require evil," meaning that everyone who is willing to look after a woman is evil!

Umm, no. It means what it says, women equals evil. I've never heard anybody say '=' as 'require'. :wacko:

thanks for killing the joke, lame ass!

I will ignore this comment, but would just like to remark that I was making a joke as well. Also, people are free to comment on posted jokes, and many people say "stupid joke" all the time, but you don't comment that THEY ruin the joke. Please, just let everybody have their opinion.

You are assuming that women act like ideal gas molecules, that the temperature and number of women inside hell are constant, and that the "edge" of hell is completely elastic and so will expand without limit, if you want to apply Boyle's Law. I think that you are misapplying Boyle's Law, which states that P1*V1=P2*V2. You might want the combined gas law, which states P1*V1/(T1*n1)=P2*V2/(T2*n2), where P=pressure, V=volume, T=temperature, and n=number of gas molecules. In this case, if you want to eliminate pressure (since we are apparently assuming that the "edge" of Hell is completely elastic and so will expand as more women enter), then you are stating that V1/n1 must equal V2/n2 for the temperature in Hell to be constant.

However, you apparently assume, later in your post, that Hell also has its own "cosmological constant," to borrow a term from astrophysics, and will expand based on another force than the pressure of the women molecules pushing against the "edge" of hell. If so, then you throw the combined gas law out the window, and have to look at whether the ratio of women : volume is increasing or decreasing based on the rate of expansion of Hell. If it is increasing, then by T1*n1=T2*n2, the temperature must go up as well, assuming that we are looking at Hell at one particular volume. If the ratio is decreasing, then the temperature must go down.

Your logic is a bit shaky, and I had to interpret a lot of what you said, but I suppose you could make that conclusion based on some assumptions, and assuming that Hell really has a cosmological constant and its edges are completely non-elastic (women bumping into them won't cause Hell to expand).

:o

Umm, no. It means what it says, women equals evil. I've never heard anybody say '=' as 'require'. :wacko:

Then why does "women = time * money" mean "women require time and money?" In this case, "women are evil" only if "women are time and money." I was simply basing the physical interpretation of "=" based on what the proof used it as in the beginning, namely, "requires."

Anyway, in conclusion, even using the proof presented here and assuming that the math is valid, "women = evil" means that "women require evil," meaning that everyone who is willing to look after a woman is evil!  :p

So if a guy is "willing to look after" a evil woman to prevent her from doing evil things then the guy is not evil at all! As we know evil is what evil does, so all women do evil things. In return, all guys are good for preventing evil things.

Require or equal, the one and the same.

  • 4 months later...

this is hilarious to even analyze... but i agree that "time and money" would be "time + money" and not "time * money"... in binary, boolean logic etc, the AND operator is always + ... therefore that is the biggest flaw in this equation.... although still really funny :p

i don't know if it has been posted before but here it goes

Women take time and money

W=T.M

But time is money

T= M

W = M.M

W = M^2

but money is the root of all evil

M = E^1/2

M^2 = E

therefore women are evil

W = E

2225972[/snapback]

timeline.jpg

Yeah Great Theroy to true

You brought this back from JUNE !!

ban_him.jpg

You are assuming that women act like ideal gas molecules, that the temperature and number of women inside hell are constant, and that the "edge" of hell is completely elastic and so will expand without limit, if you want to apply Boyle's Law.  I think that you are misapplying Boyle's Law, which states that P1*V1=P2*V2.  You might want the combined gas law, which states P1*V1/(T1*n1)=P2*V2/(T2*n2), where P=pressure, V=volume, T=temperature, and n=number of gas molecules.  In this case, if you want to eliminate pressure (since we are apparently assuming that the "edge" of Hell is completely elastic and so will expand as more women enter), then you are stating that V1/n1 must equal V2/n2 for the temperature in Hell to be constant.

However, you apparently assume, later in your post, that Hell also has its own "cosmological constant," to borrow a term from astrophysics, and will expand based on another force than the pressure of the women molecules pushing against the "edge" of hell.  If so, then you throw the combined gas law out the window, and have to look at whether the ratio of women : volume is increasing or decreasing based on the rate of expansion of Hell.  If it is increasing, then by T1*n1=T2*n2, the temperature must go up as well, assuming that we are looking at Hell at one particular volume.  If the ratio is decreasing, then the temperature must go down.

Your logic is a bit shaky, and I had to interpret a lot of what you said, but I suppose you could make that conclusion based on some assumptions, and assuming that Hell really has a cosmological constant and its edges are completely non-elastic (women bumping into them won't cause Hell to expand).

2236700[/snapback]

OK you can officially now change your member title to "The joke Killer"

BTW this joke is great thou a bit old

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!