…and this is a 
If ID was …
Category: Creationism • Humor
Posted on: September 21, 2007 1:35 PM, by PZ Myers
This game looks like it is way too much fun.
IF ID WAS MEDICINE
I could tell you you were sick, because you *look* sick. We'd have some fantastic metric for sickness that no-one has ever used and our "sick or healthy" filter would just be a concept.... that didn't work. I could maybe tell you you were sick, because you look sick but could make no comment about the disease causing the sickness, how it makes you sick or how to cure you. Real medicine would be a dogmatic religious belief, though.
Everyone can play! Pick your own analogy!
Comments
If ID were a religion it would be... well, it would be what it already is.
Posted by: Norman Doering | September 21, 2007 1:44 PM
Until, of course, the Scalpel Document is leaked, detailing how ID is only the first step in the effort to excise real medicine from hospitals. Once the dogmatism of clinical medicine, research, pathlogy, and other immoral material doctrines of health are overthrown, it will be safe to reveal that all disease is caused by 'night air' and miasmas.
Posted by: Brownian | September 21, 2007 1:46 PM
IF ID WAS A RECIPE BOOK...
... it would only show the names of different dishes, not how to prepare them, or what ingredients they may contain.
The only explanation for this would be a paragraph on the front page that says: "it's not ID's task to match your pathetic level of detail in explaining how to make a sandwich."
Posted by: Chili Pepper | September 21, 2007 1:47 PM
If ID were epidemiology, it would conclude that since we don't fully understand cancer, it must be directly caused by god. (A really nice guy, that god fellow!)
Posted by: Physicalist | September 21, 2007 1:56 PM
How many ID proponents does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
Undefined. One to claim the creator of the bulb is the only one who can change it, one to quote-mine Bulbwin's Theory of Illumination, and the rest of the sheep to argue with the Bulbwists' argument that ALL THEY NEED TO DO IS UNSCREW IT AND PUT A NEW ONE IN.
Posted by: Caucasian Jesus | September 21, 2007 2:00 PM
If ID were mathematics, irrational numbers would be ratios of integers just like normal rational numbers except irrational numbers would be irreduciably flexible. The odds of the additive identity being exactly equal to 0 as opposed to all the other possible values are infinity to one, so this would be seen as irrefutable proof. Combined with the "coincidence" that the e to the pi*i is -1, the proof is so iron-clad no more discussion is nescessary. However, no-one ever actually states what this is proof of. That fact that 7*p + 1 is prime for all prime p shows there is something intrinsic about a seven day week.
Posted by: woozy( | September 21, 2007 2:03 PM
If ID were arithmetic, everyone would accept that small numbers can be built by "micro-addition", but no amount of micro-addition could provide the macro-arithmetic necessary to build numbers larger than 6,000.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | September 21, 2007 2:06 PM
Damn right!!
Wait, what?
Posted by: chris | September 21, 2007 2:07 PM
If ID were an auto company, it would require 4 billion years before a single car was made, and it would have been "designed" by modifying a tricycle's parts into all of its components.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | September 21, 2007 2:10 PM
If ID was a computer manual
There would be one page that says "This page intentionally left blank."
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton | September 21, 2007 2:11 PM
Tracy wins! Close the thread. Game over!
Molly Award winner. Retire the trophy.
Posted by: Doc Bill | September 21, 2007 2:20 PM
Erm... Was that an intentional part of the parody in the analogy?
Posted by: SEF | September 21, 2007 2:21 PM
That fact that 7*p + 1 is prime for all prime p
Erm... Was that an intentional part of the parody in the analogy?
You are deliberately using personal attacks because you have no counter-argument. You refuse to consider the mathematical evidence because you are threatened by and therefore feel you must persicute with nazi-like ferocity anyone who questions or refuses to niavely accept the orthodoxy's lies.
Posted by: woozy | September 21, 2007 2:28 PM
If ID were a cure, we wouldn't know what the disease was.
If ID were an enzyme, either nothing would fit into it, or everything would.
If ID were magic, you'd never know what your puff of smoke would produce.
If ID were a science, it would have no labs, standards, subject matter, or material with which to work. OK, that's too easy, because it's just a description of ID now.
If ID were a computer, the output would always be exactly the same, "it was designed".
If ID was a computer chip, it would be made out of bacterial flagella, components of the clotting cascade, and cilia. After all, computer chips are machines, and so are flagella, so they're essentially the same thing.
If ID were an engineering course, it would tell the students that they ought never to have a purpose to their output, that malaria are as important as humans are, that rational design principles should give way completely to genetic algorithms, and that new ideas are completely forbidden in engineering. No wings from design principles, IOW, rather they must be derived from parts of legs like pterosaur, bird, and bat wings are.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | September 21, 2007 2:29 PM
If ID was... SPACE EXPLORATION
Behe would write a book about the moon landing hoax called "Apollo's Black Box". In it, he'd claim that the moon landing was impossible because Zeno's paradox shows that there are an infinite number of "one small steps" between here and the moon.
During the Dover trial, Behe would complain that if he wasn't shown every single "small step" betwen here and the moon, all the proof that there was "wasn't good enough".
Meanwhile, instead of testifying, Dembski would voice a Jib-Jab style Flash animation where a big-headed Neil Armstrong farts his way to Mars.
Posted by: Siamang | September 21, 2007 2:30 PM
If ID were monkeys
We'd all be covered in monkey feces.
Posted by: True Bob | September 21, 2007 2:30 PM
If creationism were medicine, you could get treated by this doctor:
[Link]
Posted by: Zeno | September 21, 2007 2:32 PM
I don't understand your analogy PZ. You must be God.
Posted by: Allen | September 21, 2007 2:34 PM
If ID were a legitimate theory... nah, that's just stretching the imagination too far.
Posted by: Fnord Prefect | September 21, 2007 2:35 PM
Woozy's post at #13 literally made me laugh out loud. Thank you, woozy!
Posted by: Wicked Lad | September 21, 2007 2:41 PM
IF ID WERE AN ART, we'd be able to tell you something was a painting, especially if it wasn't, but not who the artist was or the medium used. we would not be able to reproduce the painting.
i hope that's still part of the joke. i mean, let's test that mathematical statement:
7(1)+1=8. not prime.
7(2)+1=15. not prime
7(3)+1=22. not prime
7(4)+1=29. prime.
7(5)+1=36. not prime.
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 2:43 PM
That fact that 7*p + 1 is prime for all prime p
Erm... Was that an intentional part of the parody in the analogy?
This is so typical of supporters of the hemogeny of orthodoxy!
You are deliberately obfuscating by abusing ambiguities of the definition of the term "prime" as used in theoretical mathematics vs. how it is used in practical applications.
The fact remains. 7*p + 1 is prime or composed of primes for all positive prime greater than two.
Posted by: woozy | September 21, 2007 2:43 PM
If ID were a restaurant
You'd order from a menu that you weren't allow to see. A waiter who was really a pogo stick master would bring you a covered dish that you were not allowed to uncover. When you complained about the dish and the process you would be kicked out of the restaurant. Tomorrow you would read a review in the paper written by the pogomaster proclaiming:
Following the review would be the list of chefs solely composed of car mechanics and carpenters.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | September 21, 2007 2:46 PM
IF ID WAS A HAMMER, id hammer in the morning...
IF ID WAS A SIMPLE TOOL, it'd be a wedge.
IF ID WAS A FREUDIAN CONCEPT OF THE SELF, it would be appropriately named.
IF ID WAS A BOAT, it'd be an ID-yacht.
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 2:51 PM
Rest assured. "7*p + 1 is prime for all prime p" was most assuredly part of the joke. It's simply false. Likewise the correction (blaming the objector for insisting on adherence to obtuse terminology) that 7*p + 1 is prime or composed of primes is, of course, true but now utterly pointless and weightless "composed of primes" simply means "not prime". (7*p + 1 is always prime or not prime; gee--- ya don't say.) The bit about clarifying "positive" and "greater than two" is to parody how even after having an error pointed out IDers usually completely miss the gist of the correction.
Posted by: woozy (dropping character) | September 21, 2007 2:54 PM
If ID Were Science
They'd have stated a theory of ID by now.
Posted by: ben | September 21, 2007 2:54 PM
If ID was a coastal chart none of us would be up sh*te creek.
Posted by: Samphire | September 21, 2007 2:55 PM
If ID was a supermarket
It would be a store full of empty shelves. There would be desks up front where clerks would tell you how terrible it is to buy and consume food from other supermarkets.
They would give you pamphlets with stories of the devastating effect of consuming supermarket food. These pamphlets will also contain quotes from supermarket managers and food buyers saying that they don't believe in their own business.
When customers ask if they can get something to eat they will be repeatedly told, "Yes, but don't get it from a supermarket."
Eventually, they will sue other supermarkets demanding that they be allowed to put ID empty shelves into their stores.
Posted by: eewolf | September 21, 2007 2:59 PM
still joking, right? right?
7(7)+1=50. not prime.
7(11)+1=78. not prime
7(13)+1=92. not prime.
etc. the flaw should be obvious by now.
all primes greater than two are odd. an odd number (7) times and odd number (the prime) is also odd. adding one makes it even. no even number greater than 2 is prime, because they're all divisible by 2. you're wrong, QED.
IF ID WAS MATHEMATICS it would quickly be disproven by an arts student.
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 3:02 PM
ok, i'm glad you were kidding. it was very subtle satire, and when you insisted on it, i wasn't really sure whether you were still joking or not...
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 3:03 PM
It's better than that - it's never true! :-D It's guaranteed not to be prime for input primes (consider odd numbers to see that and then test the only prime exception of 2) and can only be prime for some non-primes. Your #13 reply wasn't really as good a parody as your #22 was though.
Posted by: SEF | September 21, 2007 3:09 PM
Re: "looking sick"
Actually, that's not as off-base as you think, as any physician will tell you.
As scientific as we try to make medicine, there is still a large degree of "art" to it and likely always will be. Indeed, recognizing when a patient "looks sick" or "looks really sick" (and it's not always as obvious as you may think) is a key skill that distinguishes good clinicians from bad clinicians. It's the difference between a clinician who catches the signs of impending sepsis and intervenes early enough to save the patient and the one who doesn't recognize that the patient is trouble until it is mind-numbingly obvious. (In surgery, we sometimes joke about such cluelessness on a surgeon's part by saying that the patient has gotten sick enough that the janitor is telling you that he has appendicitis.)
In other words, PZ has posted an example of a rather crappy analogy.
Posted by: Orac | September 21, 2007 3:19 PM
The fact remains. 7*p + 1 is prime or composed of primes for all positive prime greater than two.
7(7)+1=50 = 2*5*5. not prime. composed of primes
7(11)+1=78 = 2*3*13. not prime composed of primes
7(13)+1=92 = 2*41. not prime. composed of primes
still joking, right? right?
Sigh. Do you always put this much faith in the accuracy of ID-proponents?
==== drop character ======
there is no known way of generating primes. So any statement "formula is always prime", is always simply false (or the guy has just solved a millenia-longe unsolved problem).
A common mistake in deriving such formulas is to have their primeness determined based on a number and only test so far.
For example, Euclids proof that there are an infimite number of primes shows that adding one to the product of all primes up to some n, can not be divided by any of the primes. Hence, one could erroneously assume.
2 + 1 = 3; not div. by 2 so prime.
2*3 + 1 = 7; not div. by 2 or 3 so prime
2*3*5 + 1 = 31; not div by 2,3 or 5 so prime
2*3*5*7 + 1 = 211; not div by 2,3,5 or 7 so prime
.....
2*3*5*.....*p + 1 = P; not div by 2,3,5..... or p so prime
Can you find the error? Or the counter example?
Posted by: woozy (basher of the orthodoxy) | September 21, 2007 3:24 PM
Oi, you Blakes' 7 box of flashing lights. That's *MY* crappy analogy. ID wouldn't have any symptoms though, would it? Or those numbers over those other numbers. Or a bleepy machine. It also wouldn't ask questions to try and find the most likely issues. And it certainly wouldn't give to a wollipop at the end.
Right, I'm off to order some DCA then I'm watching "House".
GggRRRrRRRrrrrr....
Posted by: Rich | September 21, 2007 3:26 PM
If ID was...
Noah Webster, the dictionary would only contain exhortations against Samuel Johnson.
Posted by: Flex | September 21, 2007 3:27 PM
...and there would be an appendix in which it would be claimed that, if you put a bunch of ingredients in a blender for awhile, the fact that the resulting goo isn't a Twinkie is proof that evilution is false.
Posted by: Epikt | September 21, 2007 3:29 PM
Woozy wins.
The bit about additive identities in #6 made me writhe, it was so painfully spot-on. Additionaly, I would consider #22 a perfect response, even to the detail of completely failing to notice that Arachnophilia's counter-demonstration in #21 included a number of non-primes for p. Even when presented with an obvious flub in the counter-argument, they can't recognize it to use it...
Posted by: Sanguinity | September 21, 2007 3:38 PM
If ID were a manuscript,
it would consist solely of a Conclusions section. There would be no Methods or Results. All citations would be (unpublished). The manuscript would not attempt to identify the author.
Posted by: qetzal | September 21, 2007 3:42 PM
i get it now. :D
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 3:42 PM
IF ID were the Internet, we'd all be trying to download porn via the asynchronous high speed fiber connection to our abacus.
PSA: Microsoft to release Abacus3D: now with a "jillions" column and three layers of 3-Dimensionality. Weighing in at only 17 pounds, and taking up less volume than your average ping pong table, this new Abacus3D can handle your most robust 3 Dimensional Spreadsheet tasks. You can Amortize Loans, Multiply by tens of thousands, and even calculate interplanetary distances to an accuracy of 4 beads.
Order now! Abacus3D can be yours for only 4 equal payments of $299.99.*
Posted by: Jefe | September 21, 2007 3:52 PM
If ID were Criminal Law
- there wouldn't need to be a body, blood or other physical evidence to establish that a crime had occurred. If a "victim" disappeared under circumstances that were analogous to cases we know involved a homicide, we can conclude that a murder occurred.
Unfortunately, since we cannot say anything about the motive, means or identity of the perpetrator, nobody can ever get convicted for the crime.
Posted by: John Pieret | September 21, 2007 3:53 PM
qetzal wrote:
That sounds a bit like a description of the Bible.
Posted by: Norman Doering | September 21, 2007 3:57 PM
If ID were my GIRLFRIEND
She'd lecture to me about how I was doing my job all wrong while sitting on the couch eating bon-bons and watching "House." (It's such a SMART show!)
Then she'd tell my friends, parents, coworkers, and the like how much of a dope I am and that I'd be lost without her.
Then she'd call my work and tell my boss how she thinks they should restructure the company based on the intuitions of this book she read called "Good to Great," and then my boss would promptly call her an idiot and tell her to never call again.
And then she'd throw a tantrum, deny me sex, whine to said friends and relatives about how bad I treat her and how I don't respect her and how I'm oppressing her.
And then she'd sue me.
And in the end, even after she lost, some of my friends and even my own mother will speak of her with a note of sympathy and claim that maybe I was a little harsh.
Damn I'm glad I'm gay.
Posted by: Dave H | September 21, 2007 4:01 PM
If ID were a pair of shoes:
Only the right side shoe would be fit to lead
You could never take them off because the knots are irreducibly complex
The soles would last forever
Posted by: Saber | September 21, 2007 4:07 PM
(applauds woozy's portable goalposts)
If ID were music theory:
It would assert that random notation is insufficient to fully explain the diversity of sound, that notation was "written" by a "composer" but does not make any claims about the nature or identity of this "composer".
Additionally, it theorizes that natural selection alone cannot explain how music was created "by accidentals" and that sharp selection and flat selection must also be assumed to exist.
It would assert that each "type" of sound could not have evolved naturally from its alleged precursor sound. For example, the sound of thunderous applause (which is of course well known to ID theorists) could not have evolved by any natural process and that applause is irreducibly complex because, as everyone knows, the sound of one hand clapping "just wouldn't work."
Furthermore, ID claims to be a better explanatory model for harmonic modulation than the purely naturalistic model of DNA (dodecaphonic neuro-acoustics) and random notation because due to the alleged lack of so-called "transitional chords" that lead from one key to another. Despite the plethora of transitional chords found in the musical record to explain chromatic modulation, ID theorists insist that these half-step "gaps" along with the absence of quarter-tone modulations show that the record is "inconclusive."
In the words of prominent ID theorist Dr. Celine Dion, "Zere are an eenfeeneet numbaer of notes between each half-ztep of zee DNA sequence, and zo hey - where zee hell are zey?" Dr. Dion is known the world over for her work in producing and promoting the application of what is known to musicologists as "junk DNA".
As if that weren't proof enough, ID also purports to offer a better explanation for well-temperment in chromatic music (known to IDers as "complex specified intonation", or CSI) and the development of musical counterpoint. The latter claim is best supported by observation of the fugue state which so often experienced by ID theorists.
Even prominent naturalist and bluesman Richard "Screamin' Dickie" Dawkins has been quoted as saying "Any [...] fool [...] can see that Intelligent [...] composition is [...] without [...] [...] [...] doubt the [...] answers [...] Genesis [...] 'abacab' [...] the Future!"
Posted by: Kseniya | September 21, 2007 4:08 PM
If ID were science,
no one would want to learn about it.
;-)
P.S. I like my poem at the link.
Posted by: Kristine | September 21, 2007 4:09 PM
IF ID WAS MY LAWYER...
...it would successfully argue at said trial that, even though i appear on security camera to have shot the victim, i did not actually do so, and the bullet that miraculously killed the victim simply poofed into existance in his chest. the fact that it is strongly homologous to the one that left my gun would be insignificant. and since the video only captures 30 frames a second, the bullet only APPEARS to be moving across the frame. in reality, you can't prove that it's the same bullet from one frame to the next, or that it's actually moving. it might be 5 or 6 different stationary bullets, individually created and subsequently destroyed by an invisible intelligent entity. he would also argue that there is no scientific consensus about the chemical reactions needed to produce such extreme motion, demonstrating that fire simply does not create projectiles.
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 4:10 PM
If ID was SMAUEL L JACKSON
There'd be no mother f*ckin snakes on the plane.
Posted by: firemancarl | September 21, 2007 4:13 PM
IF ID WAS SAMUEL L. JACKSON...
...it would better represent the bible. and have a wallet that says "bad motherfucker" on it.
Posted by: arachnophilia | September 21, 2007 4:20 PM
If ID was geology...
Channels must have been dug by a landscape designer to make sure that water reached the sea, as water isn't clever enough to work out which direction to flow.
Strata are irreducibly complex because if your removed just one layer, it would all collapse.
The possibility of coal deposits forming from dead vegetation are so improbable that it couldn't have happened by chance, therefore
The Landscape Designera landscape designer did it.Miners and farmers are so wedded to the theory of natural geology that honest debate about the designed landscape is stifled.
The Brochure document explains how landscaping will be insinuated into geology lessons, as the begining of the replacement of natural surface philosophy.
The lanscaping may have started 6,000 years ago or it may have been much longer, but we will worry about the details once the past activities of a lanscape designer have been accepted.
Posted by: Bunjo | September 21, 2007 4:21 PM
I see the flaw in Euclid's proof.
When testing a number to see if it is prime, you must see if any prime number less than or equal to the square root of the number is a factor.
2 * 3 * 5 * 7 + 1 = 211
211^.5 ~= 14.6
Euclid's theory doesn't check 11 or 13 as factors. The larger p becomes, the more factors that are missed. Therein lies the massive flaw.
Posted by: Linkage | September 21, 2007 4:29 PM
If ID were accurate:
The ID'er him/her/itself would be a really, really awful designer.
Posted by: Samuel | September 21, 2007 4:31 PM
if ID ≠ true then
repeat until ID = true
end repeat
end if
-- Results in endless loop
Posted by: Eric Paulsen | September 21, 2007 4:36 PM
If ID were evolution, then it... um... I don't know...
Posted by: soteos | September 21, 2007 4:43 PM
Ok. Discovery Institute wants to say it is doing science without actually having to do any science. Science is hard and expensive to do, so why bother if you don't have to?
This is the Limbaugh effect. A blowhard pontificates on things he knows nothing about, and demands respect for his expertise. Just make it up Rush.
Posted by: Bert Chadick | September 21, 2007 4:48 PM
If ID was George Bush we would all be amazed.
Posted by: Jeremy | September 21, 2007 4:57 PM
If ID were an auto mechanic
He'd tell you that at some time (can't know when), for some reason (can't know why), by some means (can't know what) your car was busted by an (unidentifiable) intelligent being, whose work happens to look suspiciously like it occurred as the result of normal wear and tear from operating a car. But since he can't understand how wear and tear can do that, it must be the work of some kind of (unidentifiable) intelligent being. He hasn't ruled out gremlins. That's because he's open minded about these things, unlike all the other auto mechanics who are so dogmatic they actually went so far as to open the hood and take a look at the engine.
Posted by: Wes | September 21, 2007 4:58 PM
If ID was:
- animals, it would be a flying pig.
- math, primes would be proof of irreducible complexity.
- movie stars, it would be Mini Mini Me.
- gods, it would be an invisible pink unicorn.
- scientists, it would be William Dembski.
- nuts.
Posted by: Torbjörn Larsson, OM | September 21, 2007 5:02 PM
I wonder if #53 would make my computer explode...
Posted by: G | September 21, 2007 5:03 PM
If ID was Wikipedia user,
He would demand to have his ideas represented in a separate column in every Wikipedia entry without having to follow the entry rules or procedures. He would argue that this would be fair since the controversy must be taught.
All of his entries would say "Since there are gaps in the consensus entry it must be fallacious. Therefor Goddidit!". There would be only one references - to the ID proponents own blog. The blog would contain a list of six official ID supporters named Billy Bob - The Billy Bob list. And by the way, the blog would look really stylish.
Posted by: Pekka S | September 21, 2007 5:06 PM
Ah, but there are an infinite number of primes of the form 7n+1. Now clearly, since the universe has been in existence for only a finite amount of time, the only way for there to be an infinite number of things is for those things to have been there IN THE BEGINNING, which is, at creation.
...
Ow. That was too easy, and it made my brain hurt.
And would it be too much to ask that people use IF ID WERE... and not the mangling IF ID WAS...?
Posted by: Daniel Martin | September 21, 2007 5:07 PM
7*p + 1 is composite for every prime.
The only even prime is 2, and 7*2 + 1 = 15 = 3*5, which is composite.
All others are odd, and can be expressed in the form 2*n+1. Therefore,
7*(2*n+1) = 7*2*n + 8 = 2*(7*n+4)
which is composite.
Posted by: Loren Petrich | September 21, 2007 5:15 PM
The music theory one reminds me of an ID talk I attended in high school with a friend. At one point the speaker commented that no one would find a Beethoven symphony on the ground and conclude that symphonies must create themselves. I leaned over to my friend and said, "You show me two symphonies that can reproduce and I WILL show you symphonies that create themselves!"
Okay, as a knitter, I'll go for this one...
IF ID WERE KNITTING, to create a sweater you'd draw a picture of the sweater and then call it a day. If those pesky Needle-ists complained that not only had you not shown how to produce the sweater in a replicable way, but had in fact NOT EVEN PRODUCED THE SWEATER, you'd respond by pointing out sweaters are irreducibly complex since if you cut off a sleeve you don't have much of a sweater, do you? Also, the chances of a sweater being formed by accident are as low as the chances of a hurricane blowing through a field of sheep and producing skeins of yarn in the shape of a 747.
Oh, wait, the Needle-ists are asking for experiments now? Okay, take a pair of knitting needles and a ball of yarn, put them in a peanut butter jar, and wait six months. At the end, open the jar to reveal the complete absence of a lovely knitted sweater.
Of course, Intelligent Knitting proponents have a hard time breaking into the dogmatic ranks of mainstream knitting. Some IKers have gotten around this by following the needle-and-yarn paradigm to produce their PhD sweaters while firmly stating that in fact they don't believe in needles and yarn at all.
Posted by: Susan B. | September 21, 2007 5:17 PM
If ID were a FENCER it would be a foilist who argues every call, and if the point were not found in their favor, insist that it be thrown out on the grounds that it was too complex for the referee to describe correctly.
If ID were a theory of PHYSICS it would say that no man can describe God's laws, action at a distance is impossible, and that the sun must orbit the Earth because this is the most obvious expla...
Oh wait, that one's already been done.
Posted by: ac patriot | September 21, 2007 5:19 PM
At least I'm not the only one standing up for the good ol' English subjunctive mood. :)
Posted by: Wes | September 21, 2007 5:21 PM
Subjunctive mood rocks!
(Band name?)
Posted by: Kseniya | September 21, 2007 5:32 PM
If ID was foreign policy...
Well, just read the news to see what that would be like.
Posted by: Derek van Vliet | September 21, 2007 5:35 PM
If ID was a science... we'd be living in the new dark ages. Game over, man. Game over.
Posted by: Simon G. | September 21, 2007 5:44 PM
ERRRRKKK!!!
The flaw *isn't* in Euclid's proof. It's in using the method of Euclid's proof to generate primes.
Euclid's proof which is *flawless* states: If we assume there is a finite number of primes, we can assume there is a largest prime. We could multiply all the primes (including the largest) together and add one. The resulting number would be bigger than the largest prime so it wouldn't be prime. It wouldn't be divisible by any of the primes and thus would be prime. This is a contradiction so our assumption that there is a finite number of primes is not true. So there is an infinite number of primes.
I, subtlely but not substantially, reworded it so that one doesn't have to make the assumption that there are a finite number of primes.
My rewording: If you list the first n primes (2,3,5,...p), you can get a number P = 2*3*5*....*p + 1. This number isn't divisible by any of those primes so it is either prime, or divisible by some prime bigger than p. Thus if you list the first n primes there will always be an additional prime not listed. Therefore there are an infinite number of primes.
Important: Note, I didn't tell you how to find that prime. I just showed there had to be one.
Er... sort of. The definition is that a prime number has no factors other than itself and 1. Since it's impossible to prove a negative (that there are no factors) we have to find a few sufficient conditions. An obvious condition is we don't have check for factors *bigger* than our number. (That is to say, if we are trying to see if 5,439,871 is prime we don't need to check and see if numbers *bigger* than 5,439,871 divide into it!) This is huge step as now instead of demonstrating an *infinite* number of negatives, we only have to demonstrate at most a finite number (namely 5,439,871) number of negatives.This is as far as Euclid went. He wasn't actually concerned with finding the prime numbers. He was just concerned with the concepts of the prime numbers.
To save us trouble, we can note we only have to test smaller primes. This is because if 2 doesn't divide 5,439,871 then we know 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 etc. won't either. (We just cut our work in half!) and if 3 doesn't 6, 9, 12, 15 won't. And in general if p, prime doesn't, p*m won't either.
Finally we can cut our work *way* down with the square root rule you mention. (Because if q > sq root (p) divides p, the p/q *also* divides p and sqroot(p) > p/q so we would have found it already!)
Sorry to nitpick but when mathematicians *don't* nitpick all sorts of nasty things can sometimes crawl in.
That's true. I didn't. However in this case neither are factors and 211 is prime.
Precisely! I haven't studied these numbers nor do I know of anyone who studied them. But it's very easy to convince oneself that P=2*...*p grows much faster than p^2 and so there is a lot of room for primes. (Actually primes become rarer as you check for large values but that's still okay as the scarcity of primes doesn't shrink anywhere near as much as the P grows.
In other words.
p=2
P=2+1=3
p=3
P=2*3 + 1 = 7
p=5
P = 2*3*5 + 1 = 31 > p^2. could be composite.
But if prime the missing prime factor, q, must be 5
p=7
P = 2*3*5*7 + 1 = 211 > p^2 could be composite but if so
7
p=11
P=2*3*7*11 + 1 = 2311 >> p^2 could be composite.
If so 11
But it's not. It's prime.
p=13
P=2*3*7*11*13 + 1 = 30031 >>> p^2. could be composite.
If so 13
In fact it's not as 30031 = 59 * 509.
I had to write a computer program to find that.
I haven't had the patience for it to test if
P=2*3*5*7*11*13*17 + 1 is prime. (I bet it's not) Maybe if I made my program more efficient. (I don't have it stop checking at sq roots.)
Posted by: woozy | September 21, 2007 5:53 PM
If ID was true then there could be Bable fish, thus proving the existance of GOD. God having been proven, goes poof, making ID go poof. Thus ID can't be true.
Posted by: jufulu, FCD | September 21, 2007 6:03 PM
If ID was creationism, then ... er, no, sorry, wait, that's a tautology.
If ID was the English rugby team, they'd still loose.
If ID was a fine French wine, it'd be the dregs. Of a rotten vinegar.
If ID was a Terry Pratchett Discworld story, Great A'Tuin would eat the disc as a pizza snack. With elephant seasoning. When asked why, he(? she?) would withdraw into his(? her?) shell and refuse to come out until the meanie asking the question went away. And then claim victory.
If ID was a comedy routine, then ... er, no, sorry, wait, that's also a tautology.
Posted by: blf | September 21, 2007 6:07 PM
If ID were a cancerous mole on the ass of Saddam Hussein's drunken camel and if George W. Bush were buggering that camel then that would be okay by me.
Posted by: Norman Doering | September 21, 2007 6:21 PM
If ID was post-modern literature analysis then if one examines the darwinist paradigm of evolutionary narrative, one is faced with a choice: either reject subsemiotic dialectic theory or conclude that theoretical identity, ironically, has significance, given that explication of randomosity is interchangeable with truth. The subject is contextualised into a Batailleist `powerful communication' that includes probability as a whole, whilst choosing between neo-darwinist 'realism' and subconstructive mathematical possibility.
Thus, any number of theories or hypothesi concerning not darwinism, but neo-darwinism exist. The subject is contextualised into a socialist realism that accidentally and incidentally includes foreign evolution as a totality.
Thus, the premise of darwinistic natural realism suggests that eventual identity has intrinsic meaning, but only if Darwin's critique of the evolutionary paradigm of cohesive contiguousness is invalid. Dembski suggests the use of Behe's `explanatory filter' to read and modify "fact".
If one examines postdarwinian cultural theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept National Socialist realism or conclude that truth is capable of significance and difference, given that evolution is distinct from Meinongian Junglarity. Thus, the primary theme of the works of Dembski is the difference between society and 'society'. Predarwinian narrative holds that society, somewhat surprisingly, has objective value.
In a sense, an abundance of theories concerning subdialectic darwinianism may be revealed. The premise of the atheistic paradigm of derivitive pre-consciousness suggests that narrative comes from the collective morality.
QED
Posted by: Sam | September 21, 2007 6:31 PM
If ID were evolution, then it... um... I don't know...
Posted by: soteos
Piltdown Man?
Posted by: Mena | September 21, 2007 6:33 PM
(the above with help from the pomo generator)
Posted by: Sam | September 21, 2007 6:36 PM
If ID were horses, then beggars would walk.
If ID were candy and nuts, then no one would have a merry Christmas.
If ID were Bobby's girl, what a fickle thankless girl it'd be.
If ID paints a thousand words, why can't it explain anything?
If ID had a million dollars, it would buy you a real fur coat, 'cause that's cruel.
Posted by: Rey Fox | September 21, 2007 7:10 PM
If ID were a God it would be made of spaghetti. Yum Yum
Posted by: hootenanny | September 21, 2007 7:13 PM
If ID was a Game, you'd always play it in God-mode (cheater!)
Posted by: daenku32 | September 21, 2007 7:29 PM
If ID where my credit card
I could charge $10 every minute for a week, and yet the bill could never add up to more than about $200.
The only place I could use it would be Steve's bait and gun emporium, but the card would claim thousands of locations nationwide where it was accepted (it just wouldn't name any of them.) It would furthermore claim that thousands of people who don't own a business would accept them if they did own a business.
Despite claiming all these locations, it would claim that it wasn't able to be accepted at more locations because of unfair competition from the other credit companies.
They would give out credit cards to anyone they possibly could, including high school students, the unemployed, and the mentally handicapped. This is an effort to "teach the controversy" that credit cards work just like cash. They'd try to pass laws making themselves immune from the usual lending scrutiny and bankruptcy laws.(Hey, wait a minute now...)
Disputing a bill would be impossible. No matter how ridiculous the charge was, it happened in the past and therefore can't ever be proven. ("But, how could I possibly have bought a gumby doll on Io? It's a freaking volcanic moon!")
The dates of purchases on the monthly statement would be all out of order. When questioned, they will reply that this is consistent with all the charges coming in in a "flood" of data.
Posted by: TheFeshy | September 21, 2007 7:34 PM
If ID was the subjunctive mood, this statement am correct.
Posted by: C. M. Baxter | September 21, 2007 7:38 PM
♫ If ID were a rich man ♫
Irre-dubbi-dibbi-dubbi-dibbi-dici-bily dum
All day long ID'd biddy biddy bum.
If ID were a rich man.
ID wouldn't have to work hard.
Irre-dubbi-dibbi-dubbi-dibbi-dici-bily dum
It would be so very very quick
"God-dle... diddle-oddle... diddle-it!"
Posted by: Citizen Z | September 21, 2007 8:01 PM
If ID were a cancerous mole on the ass of Saddam Hussein's drunken camel and if George W. Bush were buggering that camel then that would be okay by me.
I'll do you one better:
how 'bout if it was the camel doing the buggering?
If ID were a broadway show, it would be the "ID monologues".
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 21, 2007 8:10 PM
If ID was library cataloguing, the Dewey number would be assigned, but the author field left blank.
Posted by: Phoenician in a time of Romans | September 21, 2007 8:19 PM
If ID were PZ he would be an art major.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
Oh...
Posted by: Doc Bill | September 21, 2007 8:41 PM
If ID was a carpenter
And Bill was a lady
ID follows Bill's e