?

Log in

Another Reason to love the Internet (& blog comment threads ... or BBSs)

« previous entry | next entry »
11th. Nov, 2005 | 05:46 pm

Scott H ::: November 10, 2005, 06:15 PM:
My favorite prime number is 4.

Now, I'm sure there are some of you out there who are on the verge of pointing out that 4 isn't prime, but I must respectfully submit that you're full of crap.

Proof:

1. Consider my dog Mooky Scoots. Dogs, as we all know, have two legs in the back and forelegs in the front. 2+4 = 6.
2. Six is an even number in that it is divisible by two with no remainder. However, I think we're all in agreement that 6 is also a very odd number of legs for a dog.
3. The only number that is both even and odd is infinity. Therefore, by 1 & 2, Mooky has an infinite number of legs.
4. By definition, a prime number is one that is divisible only by one and itself. Because infinity is both even and odd, it can necessarily only be divided by one and itself. It is therefore prime.
5. However, it's easy to show that my dog has only four legs. Q.E.D. here. (Mook is middle right).
6. Therefore, 4==infinity. Because infinity is prime, four is also prime.

Xopher (Christopher Hatton) :::: November 10, 2005, 06:46 PM:
A cute puppy, but I dispute that this photograph by itself proves that your dog has only four legs. For one thing, and not to accuse you of anything, additional legs could have been PhotoShopped out.

But even assuming that it's an unaltered photograph (and we're way into woo-woo land by assuming that) additional legs could be tucked behind the body of the (admittedly adorable) pooch, or even (if small enough) hidden in Mookyums' (sorry, having a Cute attack) fur.

Not to get too metaphysical, but since you attest at (3) that Mooky has an infinite number of legs, it is easy to demonstrate that that many legs could not possibly be simultaneously visible in a photograph; either they would be too small to see (infinitely small, in fact) or the photograph would have to be infinitely large (in fact at least infinity * (minimum visible size of a leg) large) to show them all.

Therefore, QED, some of Mooky's legs are not visible in that finite-sized photograph. But four legs are clearly visible, which in fact proves that Mooky's number of legs is not 4!

Link here | Leave a comment | Share

Comments {1}

Teresa Nielsen Hayden

...

from: tnh
date: 14th. Nov, 2005 07:59 am (UTC)
Link here

Sometimes the only thing I can do is sit back and watch in amazement.

Reply | Thread