Europe Pub (PieFed)Where is Einstein? Just wanna talk.
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/83bac32e-d426-4d81-82bf-8016d9c87948.jpeg
16 Comments
Comments from other communities
dpLess cheese = fewer holes
Fewer holes = more cheese
Less cheese = more cheese
less cheese = more cheese = less cheese = more cheese ā ā: infinite cheese glitch
cRazi_manLooks, there has gotta be a divide by zero in there somewhere, but I canāt find it.
But if I divide by less,
Cheese = more/less cheese
Which seems legit
RENORMALIZE YOUR CHEESE!
RENORMALIZE YOUR CHEESE!
RENORMALIZE YOUR CHEESE!
Sweep your Infinity Cheese Infinities
under the Persian rug!
i_love_FFTMore cheese = I eat more cheese = more missing cheese = less cheese
fossilesque
SethranKadaIm bored and tired, so im going to write my reasoning out as I attempt to fall asleep.
More cheese = more holes
More cheese (volune) = more holes (volume)
More holes (percentage) = less cheese (percentage)
This cheese is refering yo the material, where the first is referring to the object. Different variables entirely. The first is a group that explicitly includes holes, while the latter explicitly doesnāt.
More cheese (volume) = less cheese (percentage)
Idk man im tired.
its because the meme sneakily saying more holes (volume) = more holes (percentage), then using transitivity of equality. This equality isnāt allowed since the units doesnāt match.
BubsHereās how I think is the best way to word it:
There are really two types of āmore holesā
The first is the number of holes. Double the volume of cheese and you double the number of holes.
The second is the density of holes. Say the cheese has 1 hole per cubic inch. Double it to 2 holes per inch and you have twice the empty volume
The first phrase increases the number of holes by merely increasing the volume of cheese.
The second phase increases the number of holes by increasing their density.
Thereās these āontological argumentsā, which are basically folks trying to prove the existence of a god by reasoning with pure logic, so without relying on evidence. And they all sound like that. š«
One of the classics goes roughly like this:
1. There is good and bad. (Which is one hell of an axiom.)
2. A creature can exist which unifies all good properties. (Yet another hell of an axiom.)
3. Because this creature has all these good properties, it would be even gooder, if it did exist.
4. Since this creature unifies all good properties and its existence is itself a good property, it therefore must exist.
These arguments are also always funny, because the same logic can be used to āproveā all kinds of things. For example, a perfect island can exist, therefore it must exist. š
As far as I can tell, the arguments donāt actually get better over time either, but rather just more convoluted, to make it less obvious how silly they areā¦
I usually heard the BS from a creationist perspective.
The universe cannot exist without a creator ā¦ which is also a hell of an assumption to turn into an axiom.
and people say religion doesnāt harm peopleā¦ It obliterates their ability to logic.
edinbruh
ZerushNo cat has 5 legs, but a cat has 4 legs more than no cat, so a cat has 9 legs
corvusNot surprising coming from a cat, not its field of expertise. Ask a mouse and it will explain you the difference between intensive and extensive properties of the cheese.
darklamerEmmental can go fuck themselves. Appenzell makes superior cheese.
dreadbeefyes cat, cheese with holes is less cheese than cheese without holes of the same dimensions ( you know what i mean lemmy)
The reason this doesnāt work is because the āmoreā amd ālessā competitors work on different things entirely. These are not mathematically correct statements in any way.
The sequence is completely correct until the point it decides that
more ā¦ less ā” less.Yes. But it would be more correct to include what the āmoreā and ālessā are comparing to so that it would be immediately obvious why the last sentences is wrong.
infinite cheese = infinite holes = infinite no cheese.
Did anyone actually think this was valid reasoning?
The amount of cheese is the same
The holes just inflate it
Just like when you blow air into a balloon.
Why so vaguely threatening? I just want to talk. Five minutes alone.
Checkmate Wisconsinites
More Holes = Less Density
More Cheese != More Holes Per Volume
As the prophet Les McCann said, āCompared to what?ā
More holes = less cheese is the error.
More cheese = more holes is the error. Since the type of cheese isnāt specified, it would only apply to a small number of cheeses.
There is a cheese where the production got so good that they had no holes anymore so they added something to the cheese to get the ātypicalā holes back XDĀ Ā Ā Ā Ā
But sadly forgot which cheese it was exactlf
Forget no more!
https://youtu.be/evV05QeSjAw
That was interesting thanks !
Thank you for correcting/complimenting me with an actual source o7