After the open house at the college radio station, I paid a visit to a now-defunct cafe that used to be downstairs from the radio station studio and found the following calculation written on the wall:
I'm a little uncertain about the first premise (that girlfriends are the product of time and money). But if that premise holds true, it's hard to deny the conclusion that girlfriends are evil.
You've been warned.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I was an angry 14- or 15-year-old in late 1978 or early 1979 - can't recall which year, but definitely angry - walking home on a Sunday night after a dishwasher shift at Grandma's Saucy Apron, a now-defunct Italian restaurant in my hometown where I was working to make money for a Spanish National…
In case you somehow missed it: tech writer and blogger Kathy Sierra canceled public appearances after receiving death threats. In addition to the death threats, she called attention to some posts about her that were threatening in tone (though probably falling short of actual threats) and…
After posting this essay about skeptical theism last week, Michael Egnor showed up in the comments to heckle me. Egnor, if you are unfamiliar with him, is a blogger for the Discovery Institute, which does not bode well for the merits of his comment. He opened his remarks sensibly enough by…
I'm going to be busy all day (more or less) at the Steinmetz Symposium, listening to talks about the fantastic things our students have been doing with their research projects. So it's going to be a "talk among yourselves" day here at Uncertain Principles, for the most part.
It's been a little…
There's a ± missing, so it's also possible that either
-girlfriends = evil
or
girlfriends = -evil
Perhaps "Girlfriends = Time * Money" is a lemma proven previously on the wall?
Or maybe I just like to use the word "lemma" whenever I can?
Of course, this logic works for anything that costs time and money. Babies, for example. Golf. Earning a PhD.
Wait a sec...
@D.C.: That's not correct. Even if money could be either root of evil (positive or negative), money squared is still evil, never -evil.
Why does that quotation get mangled so often?
http://kingjbible.com/1_timothy/6.htm
1 Timothy 6:10: "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
@bill:
OK, fine, so use "love of" in the equation. Since we are potentially talking about love of girlfriends as well, the "love of" part cancels out and you are still left with the same conclusion.
Yes, I have no girlfriend, presently, why do you ask? (No, I'm not bitter.)
Only assuming love, money, and girlfriends are part of an integral domain, which I am inclined to doubt.
The premise comes as hilarious, but I'll grant it. Still, even granting that, and the improper paraphrase "money is the root of all evil," it still doesn't work. Who says "the root" means "the SQUARE root." For all we know it could mean the cube root, the 15-dimensonial hyper-cube root (which would equal n^(1/15), or the 1.01010101... "root of all evil." It even gets more funny when you think about the saying "for the love of the money is the root of all evil." There the "root" gets thought of something like a tree's root, from which the tree springs and which helps sustain the tree. So, more or less, the love of money in some way causes evil. Does a number such as 1.414... get caused by a square root operation? Nope, just equality without causality. In fact, if we did say that a square root operation of 2 causes 1.414..., then by the symmetric property of equality we would have to conclude that 1.414... causes the operation of the square root of 2. Numbers creating functions indeed!