Lord Monckton

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7377
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#351

Post by Sam the Centipede » Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:50 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:It is proper to capitalize the "N" in "Newton" and the "J" in "Joule" as they are named after people. :mrgreen:
It's proper for Sir Isaac N and Mr. James Prescott J (a good man - he brewed beer). But it's incorrect for the eponymous units. As is capitalizing the "m" in meganewton. C'est pas le système international.

You know all too well: just as the right-wing nuttosphere is infested with conspiracy theorists, so the Fogbow saneworld is infested with pedants. Well, not exactly pedants...
Off Topic
The SI system* has seven (IIRC) base units for mass, length, time, etc. and a platoon of derived units, but it doesn't have a unit for bumptious intercontinental asshattery, which clearly should be the monckton. The unit of bloviation would have to be the apuzzo (abbreviation Azzzz). If Mario's typical "winning" post is rated at 1 Azzzzz, that makes an ordinary pointless sentence (such as this one) about one milliapuzzo, or 1 mAzzzz. Of course, there is no contest for the unit of pure incompetence, the taitz.

* Yes, I know!



User avatar
Slarti the White
Posts: 7048
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#352

Post by Slarti the White » Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:58 pm

magdalen77 wrote:Bless me, father, for I have sinned. I've failed to capitalize "Curie", "Gray" and "Sievert".

Sorry, Slarti. I think I'm overtired.
Hey! I'm not just making this stuff up!

Okay, DON'T PANIC, write out the first 100 lines of Pascal's triangle, use the Euler characteristic to prove there are only five platonic solids and have a pan galactic gargle blaster and when you come to you'll be forgiven.

rAmen

:towel:


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Slarti the White
Posts: 7048
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#353

Post by Slarti the White » Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:16 am

Sam the Centipede wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:It is proper to capitalize the "N" in "Newton" and the "J" in "Joule" as they are named after people. :mrgreen:
It's proper for Sir Isaac N and Mr. James Prescott J (a good man - he brewed beer). But it's incorrect for the eponymous units. As is capitalizing the "m" in meganewton. C'est pas le système international.

You know all too well: just as the right-wing nuttosphere is infested with conspiracy theorists, so the Fogbow saneworld is infested with pedants. Well, not exactly pedants...
Off Topic
The SI system* has seven (IIRC) base units for mass, length, time, etc. and a platoon of derived units, but it doesn't have a unit for bumptious intercontinental asshattery, which clearly should be the monckton. The unit of bloviation would have to be the apuzzo (abbreviation Azzzz). If Mario's typical "winning" post is rated at 1 Azzzzz, that makes an ordinary pointless sentence (such as this one) about one milliapuzzo, or 1 mAzzzz. Of course, there is no contest for the unit of pure incompetence, the taitz.

* Yes, I know!
There is already a rating system for the quality of cocuments from tripe to Taitzed (~3.2 exa-tripe or a mega-Titanic).


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
magdalen77
Posts: 5394
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:43 pm
Location: Down in the cellar

Re: Lord Monckton

#354

Post by magdalen77 » Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:04 am

Slartibartfast wrote:
magdalen77 wrote:Bless me, father, for I have sinned. I've failed to capitalize "Curie", "Gray" and "Sievert".

Sorry, Slarti. I think I'm overtired.
Hey! I'm not just making this stuff up!

Okay, DON'T PANIC, write out the first 100 lines of Pascal's triangle, use the Euler characteristic to prove there are only five platonic solids and have a pan galactic gargle blaster and when you come to you'll be forgiven.

rAmen

:towel:
You do know that I'm a bio major, don't you?



User avatar
magdalen77
Posts: 5394
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:43 pm
Location: Down in the cellar

Re: Lord Monckton

#355

Post by magdalen77 » Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:06 am

I'm nor sure that I trust Plato anyway. What about Liebniz? I always liked his monads. :towel:



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45296
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Lord Monckton

#356

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:56 am

Say watt?

You've forgiven.



User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7377
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#357

Post by Sam the Centipede » Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:18 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
magdalen77 wrote:Bless me, father, for I have sinned. I've failed to capitalize "Curie", "Gray" and "Sievert".

Sorry, Slarti. I think I'm overtired.
Hey! I'm not just making this stuff up!

Okay, DON'T PANIC, write out the first 100 lines of Pascal's triangle, use the Euler characteristic to prove there are only five platonic solids and have a pan galactic gargle blaster and when you come to you'll be forgiven.

rAmen

:towel:
Only five platonic (or Platonic) solids? How few dimensions do you work in? Are you a Flatlander, or - I hardly dare say it for fear of sounding racist - a Volumista?

Forgo compactification, spread out the manifold, enjoy the higher dimensions!



User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7955
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: Lord Monckton

#358

Post by Flatpointhigh » Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:36 pm

That ol' Janx Spirit
[bbvideo=560,315][/bbvideo]



My Name is...
Daffy Duck.. woo hoo!
Cancer broke me

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Lord Monckton

#359

Post by SueDB » Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:14 pm

Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.


“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Slarti the White
Posts: 7048
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#360

Post by Slarti the White » Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:19 pm

Sam the Centipede wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:
magdalen77 wrote:Bless me, father, for I have sinned. I've failed to capitalize "Curie", "Gray" and "Sievert".

Sorry, Slarti. I think I'm overtired.
Hey! I'm not just making this stuff up!

Okay, DON'T PANIC, write out the first 100 lines of Pascal's triangle, use the Euler characteristic to prove there are only five platonic solids and have a pan galactic gargle blaster and when you come to you'll be forgiven.

rAmen

:towel:
Only five platonic (or Platonic) solids? How few dimensions do you work in? Are you a Flatlander, or - I hardly dare say it for fear of sounding racist - a Volumista?

Forgo compactification, spread out the manifold, enjoy the higher dimensions!
You got me on small-"p" Platonic, but I'm not doing the math for more than three dimensions. If I had wanted to know how the Euler characteristic applied to surface volume, side area and vertex length I would have studied algebraic topology. *shudder*


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Slarti the White
Posts: 7048
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#361

Post by Slarti the White » Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:36 pm

magdalen77 wrote:I'm nor sure that I trust Plato anyway. What about Liebniz? I always liked his monads. :towel:
Academically speaking, I'm the great12-grandson of Leibniz through Euler, two Bernoullis, Lagrange, Poisson and Hildebrandt.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7377
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#362

Post by Sam the Centipede » Tue Jan 05, 2016 4:47 am

Slartibartfast wrote:
Sam the Centipede wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:
Hey! I'm not just making this stuff up!

Okay, DON'T PANIC, write out the first 100 lines of Pascal's triangle, use the Euler characteristic to prove there are only five platonic solids and have a pan galactic gargle blaster and when you come to you'll be forgiven.

rAmen

:towel:
Only five platonic (or Platonic) solids? How few dimensions do you work in? Are you a Flatlander, or - I hardly dare say it for fear of sounding racist - a Volumista?

Forgo compactification, spread out the manifold, enjoy the higher dimensions!
You got me on small-"p" Platonic, but I'm not doing the math for more than three dimensions. If I had wanted to know how the Euler characteristic applied to surface volume, side area and vertex length I would have studied algebraic topology. *shudder*

I'm not particularly mathematical, so I too stick with three spatial dimensions in my ordinary life. :-D

A few years ago, I wondered why there are only 5 (three-dimensional :evil: ;) ) Platonic solids and came up with the simple reasoning that it requires at least there faces to meet at each vertex and the combined internal angles of those faces at the vertex must sum to a total that is strictly more than 180° and strictly less than 360° (radians are available on request for vegetarians). Hence triangles with 60° internal angles can have 4 (total 240°) or 5 faces meeting but not 3 (total 180°) or 6 (total 360°), squares can only have 3 (total 270°, a cube), pentagons and hexagons also 3. Regular heptagons have an internal angle of approx. 128.5° and 3×128.5°>360° so heptagons hate Plato.

I don't know the proof using Euler's characteristic, but as that uses the topology of the polyhedron's net, I guess it must be more powerful and demonstrate that the result holds even if the faces are not congruent or regular.

Is there an on-topic connection? Oh yes, the lad checks Wikipedia, slips his marker and lands one in the net! Higher dimensional analogs (polytopes) were investigated in the 19thC by Swiss mathematician Ludwig Schläfli. To me, that looks to be the same (pre-Americanization) family name as the vile racist right-wing nutjob Phyllis Schlafly and her spawn, the equally vile Andy Sclafly, the founder and chief hatemonger of the RWNJ and Christian dominionist fountain of crap, Conservapedia. Coincidentally, Andy's brother Roger is a mathematician. IIRC Roger is also gay, which must annoy his hatemongering family intensely! :dance:

Fun fact: in its early days, Conservapedia's website had a graphic proclaiming it to be "Conservapedia: the trusworthy encyclopedia" [sic].
:



User avatar
Slarti the White
Posts: 7048
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#363

Post by Slarti the White » Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:25 am

Sam,

Note that a Platonic solid is a regular polyhedron, so all of its faces are regular and congruent. Briefly, the Euler characteristic says that vertices minus edges plus faces equals two for all polyhedra (this can be proven by puncturing one face, mapping the polyhedra to a planar graph and triangulating it. With this relationship, the fact that regularity implies if the polyhedron has faces with n edges each and m faces meet at each vertex then the following equations hold:

V - E + F = 2

2E = nF

mE = 2V

The only solutions to these equations amongst the integers give us the tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron and icosahedron.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
rpenner
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Contact:

Re: Lord Monckton

#364

Post by rpenner » Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:22 am

Slartibartfast wrote: :snippity:
mE = 2V

The only solutions to these equations amongst the integers give us the tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron and icosahedron.
The last equation should read n F = 2 E = m V, I think. Also, I think you need to constrain F, E and V to positive integers and n (edges per face) to an integer 3 or larger, or you get families of solutions like F = E = m, V = n = 2 or F = -1, E = -9, V = -6, n = 18, m = 3,
 F  E  V V+F–E 2E/F 2E/V
 4  6  4   2    3    3 Tetrahedron, 3 3-gons meet at every vertex
 6 12  8   2    4    3 Hexahedron, 3 4-gons meet at every vertex ( a regular hexahedron is a cube)
 8 12  6   2    3    4 Octahedron, 4 3-gons meet at every vertex
12 30 20   2    5    3 Dodecahedron, 3 5-gons meet at every vertex
20 30 12   2    3    5 Icosahedron, 5 3-gons meet at every vertex
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=n_ ... 4+%3E%3D+3



User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7377
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#365

Post by Sam the Centipede » Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:10 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:Sam,

Note that a Platonic solid is a regular polyhedron, so all of its faces are regular and congruent. Briefly, the Euler characteristic says that vertices minus edges plus faces equals two for all polyhedra (this can be proven by puncturing one face, mapping the polyhedra to a planar graph and triangulating it. With this relationship, the fact that regularity implies if the polyhedron has faces with n edges each and m faces meet at each vertex then the following equations hold:

V - E + F = 2

2E = nF

mE = 2V

The only solutions to these equations amongst the integers give us the tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron and icosahedron.
Yeah, I know that (although I don't have the equations committed to memory!). My point was that if this topological relationship on the net works, then the geometric condition of congruency and regularity is unnecessary and the proof is more general. That is, the proof using the Euler formula demonstrates that one could not make a polyhedron of (say) heptagons (regular or otherwise, not necessarily congruent) where some constant number N (N≥3) heptagon vertices meet at each vertex of the polyhedron. My loose geometric reasoning only works for regular congruent polygons.

But I think it doesn't demonstrate (nor does it attempt to) that one cannot make a polyhedron using regular congruent polygons but with varying numbers of polygons meeting at each vertex - imagine two tetrahedra pushed together and the joining faces removed. But triangles are always the most potent geometers! Squares won't work (unless one accepts coplanar faces), so that probably only applies to triangles.

Can one pave a polyhedron with congruent heptagons, or congruent hexagons (relaxing the condition on constant number of faces at each vertex)? You can have three faces meeting if the fatter corners are kept apart from each other, but do those fat corners eventually bite you on the backside? This is left as an exercise for the reader, or for Lord Monckton, as he's such a friggin' mathematical genius, in his own mind.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45296
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Lord Monckton

#366

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:05 pm

Math porn!

Now I know what you must feel like when we discuss law porn on other threads. :geezertowel:



User avatar
Slarti the White
Posts: 7048
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#367

Post by Slarti the White » Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:18 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:Math porn!

Now I know what you must feel like when we discuss law porn on other threads. :geezertowel:
True, I much prefer this elegant erotica to the depravity the Fog-B.A.R. sometimes engages in...
:towel:


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
BillTheCat
Posts: 4496
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:25 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#368

Post by BillTheCat » Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:39 pm

Maths! Well at least this thread is being used for something worthwhile, as opposed to discussing human-refuse Lord Monkeypants.


'But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice. 'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.'
-Lewis Carroll

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7377
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#369

Post by Sam the Centipede » Tue Jan 05, 2016 3:46 pm

BillTheCat wrote:Maths! Well at least this thread is being used for something worthwhile, as opposed to discussing human-refuse Lord Monkeypants.
Hey! I lobbed in a couple of references to RWNJs and Lord Monkeybutt in a pretence of staying on topic! :-D

And if Lord Monkeybutt wants to be discussed in this thread, he should do something interesting. It's his fault. Typical lord, leaving it to the peasants to do the dirty work.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13012
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#370

Post by Notorial Dissent » Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:19 pm

Speaking of the Monkeybutt, isn't he still doing time for wasting HM's constabulary's time? I'll bet he's met a whole class of society he isn't happy with during his sojourn. He's also been remarkably quiet as far as I can tell, which is all to the good in my opinion.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29130
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Lord Monckton

#371

Post by Foggy » Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:35 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:Speaking of the Monkeybutt, isn't he still doing time for wasting HM's constabulary's time?
No, I think that was the other British frootloop ... can't remember his name. Called in a threat of a nuke at the Olympics.


I put the 'fun' in dysfunctional.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#372

Post by bob » Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:36 pm

Foggy wrote:
Notorial Dissent wrote:Speaking of the Monkeybutt, isn't he still doing time for wasting HM's constabulary's time?
No, I think that was the other British frootloop ... can't remember his name. Called in a threat of a nuke at the Olympics.
Shrimpton was the other British frootloop, who is doing time.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29130
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Lord Monckton

#373

Post by Foggy » Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:44 pm

Right you are! It's the shrimp cracker who's in the clink, not Monkton.


I put the 'fun' in dysfunctional.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13012
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#374

Post by Notorial Dissent » Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:14 pm

Pity, I think it would do Monkeysbutt some good.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14353
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Lord Monckton

#375

Post by Dolly » Wed Jan 06, 2016 2:07 am

Sekrit Stuffs!
Sam the Centipede wrote: <snip>
the vile racist right-wing nutjob Phyllis Schlafly and her spawn, the equally vile Andy Sclafly, the founder and chief hatemonger of the RWNJ and Christian dominionist fountain of crap, Conservapedia. Coincidentally, Andy's brother Roger is a mathematician. IIRC Roger is also gay, which must annoy his hatemongering family intensely! :dance:

Fun fact: in its early days, Conservapedia's website had a graphic proclaiming it to be "Conservapedia: the trusworthy encyclopedia" [sic]. :
One of my real life acquaintances and Facebook friends, is a frequent copy/paster of Conservapedia text rather than writing his own opinions in comments. :eek2:

Are you aware that they are in the process of rewriting the Bible?

http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project
The Conservative Bible Project is a project utilizing the "best of the public" to render God's word into modern English without archaic language and liberal translation distortions.

Isaac Newton, who was merely an average student, worked on translating the Bible and that gave him the inspiration and insight for inventing calculus, developing mechanics, and discovering gravity. Going beyond reading the Bible to translating it also enables eradication of liberal distortions that have crept in, such as pro-abortion bias against references to the unborn child. Just as Shakespeare's works are losing interest in the West due to its increasingly archaic language, the use of archaic and liberal language in Western translations of the Bible loses people.

Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning: <Big Snip of :twisted: >

First Example - Liberal-Promoted Falsehood
The earliest, most authentic manuscripts of the Gospel According to Luke lack this verse fragment set forth at the start of Luke 23:34:[13] :?

Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
Is this a corruption of the original, perhaps promoted by liberals (when they wrote the King James Version? :roll: ) without regard to its authenticity? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals, although it does not appear in the earliest and best manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke. It should not appear in a conservative Bible, because in point of fact Jesus might never had said it at all.
Luke 23:34

King James Version
Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

Proposed Conservative Translation
They divided His clothes, and gambled for them.

Analysis
The statement attributed to Jesus in this verse is likely not authentic.[1][2] Proponents of the authenticity of these words claim they are necessary to fulfill a prophecy of Isaiah 53:12.
When I copy/paste the link it changes in the Preview. You will have to click on LUKE on the main page and choose the correct chapter. Stoopid.

Forgiveness, Compassion, Love = Liberal = Not Good Enough For A Conservative Christian Bible :madguy:


Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

Post Reply

Return to “Lesser Lights”