New thread for all of my other thoughts and ideas and projects

I made this thread because MasterPlanSoftware told me to. Many of my ideas are available on ChronoJournal, but here are some of my ideas, with some duplication (but not all duplication):
 It's sometimes claimed that prayer doesn't work, it doesn't increase the probability of getting whatever you prayed for. I think probabilities are not calculated like that. I also think that assigning material efficacy to prayer is like greed, and greed should be avoided.
 Planeswalkers are a good idea, but I don't like the implementation that well. I have my own idea of how it is done: You don't have a chance to automatically redirect damage to planeswalkers. Instead, cards should say something like "1 damage to target permanent or player" and if the target is a planeswalker, loyalty counters are removed. Abilities should be worded differently, and not use a different textbox than other cards. "+1: ..." would be short for "{T}, Add a loyalty counter to ~: ... Use this ability only as a sorcery." A card that is both a planeswalker and a creature takes that amount of damage in both ways.
 I even invented my own religion.
 Linestring mathematics

Furious Fucking Furries Flame Fest Feasting Furiously
@zzo38 said:
I even invented my own religion.
The great DM in the sky smites you for your ignorance. How dare you mention the term religion when you fail to worship the great DM. You dare ignore the fact the the world will end in 2012 unless the great YellowHead saves us all and gives his infamous speech? You must have rolled a 3 for you wisdom, spend some time rollplaying to get some exp so you can invest some ranks in Knowledge (Religion) for compensation, or hell, ask the great DM for a few balors so you can grind.

@Lingerance said:
You dare ignore the fact the the world will end in 2012
The calculation about the world ending 12/21/2012 is flawed due to a floating point math error in the Mayan computer. After correcting for this and reanalyzing I've concluded the correct date is June 20, 2008
And the thing about two minutes to midnight was off as well, it's actually only one minute to midnight.

@Lingerance said:
@zzo38 said:
I even invented my own religion.
The great DM in the sky smites you for your ignorance. How dare you mention the term religion when you fail to worship the great DM. You dare ignore the fact the the world will end in 2012 unless the great YellowHead saves us all and gives his infamous speech? You must have rolled a 3 for you wisdom, spend some time rollplaying to get some exp so you can invest some ranks in Knowledge (Religion) for compensation, or hell, ask the great DM for a few balors so you can grind.Yeah, n00bs these days don't know how to min/max properly. I bet he's a singleclassed Fighter, to boot.

TRWTF is that your post is making blood come out of my ears, when I am reading it with my eyes.
I've cranked my sarcasm detector high enough to void the warranty, and I really do hope this is a sarcastic OP  but for some reason the pain just won't go away, and that scares me.

@ObiWayneKenobi said:
Yeah, n00bs these days don't know how to min/max properly. I bet he's a singleclassed Fighter, to boot.
Wizards are just as good as fighters, I mean who the hell really needs BaB and HP? Fireball and Wall of Fire do more damage to undead than a mace could, hell wizards even get bonus feats! Fighter is just really a wizard without spells and a familiar, why would any one ever want to be one?

@zzo38 said:
Linestring mathematics
I'm not sure what to think of this. If I thought you were a troll, then I'd believe you are one of the best trolls ever from this post alone. Basically everything you say in this post is either wrong or complete nonsense:@Linestring mathematics said:
You can write any positive real number as a string of zeros and ones, not in binary notation, but in the linestring notation which is: You draw a line on a grid with slope of the number you want, starting at the origin, and horizonal and vertical lines at unit distances from eachother across the grid. If the line crosses a horizontal line you write 0 and if it crosses a vertical line you write 1. If it crosses an intersection then that is the end of the string.
@Linestring mathematics said:
The number 1 is a null string, infinity is a infinite string of ones, and its reciprocal (1/infinity) is a infinite string of zeros.
These two lines are in direct contradiction. First of all, by the above definition of the strings, "ones" represent horizontal movement, while "zeroes" represent vertical movement. A line with an infinite slope is a vertical one, a line with a slope of zero is a horizontal one. Your definition of infinity and 0 are backward with respect to the other numbers respresented in your system.Secondly, even assuming the backward nature of infinity and zero was just a typo, zero (and infinity) as you've defined it is in contradiction with conventional mathematics and itself. A line with a slope of zero is a horizontal line, meaning it crosses the (1,0) "intersection" without ever crossing any horizontal or vertical lines. Of course, this means that the string representing zero, one and infinity are all the null string so you came up with the limitlike notation of infinite ones and zeroes.
@Linestring mathematics said:
Any string representing a valid positive real number is a palindrome.
Your system can only represent rational numbers in finite space. Infinite strings (representing the majority of "valid positive real numbers") cannot be palindromes since they do not terminate. This statement is completely false.@Linestring mathematics said:
To figure out which of 2 numbers is greater, write the strings below eachother (leftaligned) with a dot at the end of each string. Find the first position in which the strings differ. Zero is worth the least, one is worth the most, and the dot is worth in between.
According to your above definition, the number 2 is represented by the string "0" and the number 4/3 by "10101". According to this algorithm for determining which of two numbers is larger, "10101." is larger than "0.". In other words, 4/3 > 2, which is wrong.@Linestring mathematics said:
To calculate the "simplest number" between two numbers, you have to follow these steps: ...
You need to define what a "simplest number" is or else it's meaningless to know it. Is it a weighted average of some kind? What use does this number have?Basically all you've done is come up with a way of representing rational numbers by encoding the numerator and denominator in unary, only without negative numbers and with a terribly useless definition of zero. You've managed to come up with a less efficient way of dealing with numbers than even the Romans had. I suppose that's reason enough to be impressed.

@Welbog said:
@zzo38 said:
Linestring mathematics
Thanks for pointing out all of my typing mistakes. It is not meant to be a new useful way of dealing with numbers. I will fix them later today. One mistake is that 0 is crossing a horizontal line (representing vertical movement) which is wrong. There are a few other mistakes as well. Thanks for pointing them out to me so I can correct it. Because without pointing it out to me like that, it will be wrong forever. Once I fix the typing mistakes, it will be perfectly correct.

@zzo38 said:
Once I fix the typing mistakes, it will be perfectly correct.
You can fix typos, but you cannot fix stupid.

@zzo38 said:
Once I fix the typing mistakes, it will be perfectly correct.
Oh? So tell me, how do you draw a line with slope of pi (3.14159265...)? Or e (2.7182818...)? Or any other transcendental number? If you're claiming that your method can perfectly represent ANY real number, then you'd better come up with a method of handling those pesky infinitelynonrepeating numbers that are members of the set of real numbers.

@MarcB said:
@zzo38 said:
Once I fix the typing mistakes, it will be perfectly correct.
Oh? So tell me, how do you draw a line with slope of pi (3.14159265...)? Or e (2.7182818...)? Or any other transcendental number? If you're claiming that your method can perfectly represent ANY real number, then you'd better come up with a method of handling those pesky infinitelynonrepeating numbers that are members of the set of real numbers.
Yes it is possible, but then the string representing it is also infinitely long, but you can still do calculation with it such as figure out which is larger, or a number in between, etc. The golden ratio starts: "101101011011" and if 2 is "1" then the golden ratio is less ("0" is worth less than the end of the string).

@zzo38 said:
Yes it is possible, but then the string representing it is also infinitely long,
Exactly. It is also irrational, yet you claim you can determine the numerators and denominators by countings the 1's and 0's. But that directly contradicts the fact that irrational numbers can NOT be expressed as a proper fraction. So are you saying that pi is really 22/7?

@MarcB said:
No, you can't count the 1's and 0's if there are an infinite number of them. That is how mathematics just works in general. It is nothing specific to this idea.@zzo38 said:
Yes it is possible, but then the string representing it is also infinitely long,
Exactly. It is also irrational, yet you claim you can determine the numerators and denominators by countings the 1's and 0's. But that directly contradicts the fact that irrational numbers can NOT be expressed as a proper fraction. So are you saying that pi is really 22/7?

have you tried defining other operations in this notation like addition, multiplication, square root etc. ?

@MarcB said:
@zzo38 said:
To be fair, the limit of the sum of all ones over the sum of all zeroes will be pi. The algebraic numbers are only closed under a finite number of operations, so infinite sequences of rational numbers can be equal to transcendentals. E.g., 4  4/3 + 4/5  4/7 + 4/9  ... = piYes it is possible, but then the string representing it is also infinitely long,
Exactly. It is also irrational, yet you claim you can determine the numerators and denominators by countings the 1's and 0's. But that directly contradicts the fact that irrational numbers can NOT be expressed as a proper fraction. So are you saying that pi is really 22/7?Not that this is useful in this case, since you need to be able to predict whether a given arbitrary character in pi's string representation is going to be 0 or 1.

@Welbog said:
Not that this is useful in this case, since you need to be able to predict whether a given arbitrary character in pi's string representation is going to be 0 or 1.
There's nothing useful about this system.


But it can find rational numbers between two other rational numbers! If zzo38 could only add negative numbers and nullity, he'd be ushering in a new golden age of mathematics!

@Welbog said:
lern2quoteBut it can find rational numbers between two other rational numbers! If zzo38 could only add negative numbers and nullity, he'd be ushering in a new golden age of mathematics!

I was replying to both of you, and that's pretty obvious. You realize you don't need to quote everything because in addition to the referrential integrity of quoting we also have temporal coupling of posting one fucking post after another. I'm sorry that you don't know how forums work. Go back to #TDWTF and cry to your demigod MPS about it. Hail ammoQ!

@Welbog said:
I was replying to both of you, and that's pretty obvious. You realize you don't need to quote everything because in addition to the referrential integrity of quoting we also have temporal coupling of posting one fucking post after another. I'm sorry that you don't know how forums work. Go back to #TDWTF and cry to your demigod MPS about it. Hail ammoQ!
lern2quote

@Welbog said:
..rant..
Whoa, belwog! It'll be alright. Taking TDWTF seriously can be bad for your health. Consult your doctor if you experience any side effects.

DICKPUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNCH!!!

@Welbog said:
posting one fucking post after another.
Threaded view FTW.
We win, You lose.
lern2quote, noob.

The threaded view is obviously for losers. Get back to Usenet, thready.


Epic protip: a post in a thread that does not explicitly indicate to whom it replies is implicitly replying to the post above it in a temporal view. That's how almost all forums work. QQ to those who don't know how to use forums. Thread locked due to AIDS.


@bstorer said:
There's nothing useful about this system.
Probably of great interest to the storage manufacturers (seagate, hitachi, etc...). This could be the greatest thing since XML for boosting their sales. Ditto for CPU/printer/scanner/paper makers. We'll need some honkin' big processors to handle the strings produced by this, ultralarge printers to print out the graphs and lines, and matchingwidth scanners to OCR in the graphs and counting the line crossings.
I suppose wooden table makers will be interested as well. Going to need very large ones to hold all those prints prior to scanning.

Enough flamefesting. (Not that I expected anything usefull to show up in this thread anyway, it has written flamebait all over it)