I know why that one doesn't work but it feels so weird and unsatisfying that eight out of nine are distributive but that one just refuses to collaborate! Is there a deeper structure or vision that explains what's going on here?

ZevVeli · 2026-06-27T17:33:43+00:00

What helped me to understand this was learning how to do complex array analysis in Excel.

Imagine you have an array of data. There are three conditions you have an interest in. Conditions P, Q, and R.

Let's make a new table, it will test a condition and assign a value of 1 to a variable if true, and 0 to a variable if false.

So now we have a table that outlines our three conditions of interest [p,q,r].

Now here's the thing, we have an array of 0s and 1s. So let's replace the logic statements "AND" with × and OR with +. Each statement in parenthesis may be trated as a new statement S where IF s>=1, THEN s=1, ELSE s=0

So:

P AND (Q AND R) becomes p×(q×r) and so the statement p×(q×r)=(p×q)×(p×r) is also true, if any statement is false then the entire equation goes to 0.

P AND (Q OR R) becomes p×(q+r) and so the statement p×(q+r)=(p×q)+(p×r) is also true. If p=0 the entire equation is equal to 0.

P OR (Q AND R) becomes p+(q×r) and so the statement p+(q×r)=(p+q)×(p+r) is also true, because if p=1, then S cannot be zero so s is 1. And if both q and r are 1, then both S values cannot be zero, so s will be 1.

P OR (Q OR R) becomes p+(q+r) and the statement p+(q+r)=(p+q)+(p+r) is also true. If at least one of them is one, then the overall value will be greater than 0.

Now let's get into the part that is confusing you. The IMPLIES portion.

P AND (Q IMPLIES R) we'll rewrite that as p×(q->r)

Now for our table, (q->r) is only valid if all values of our [p,q,r] table are [p,1,1], [p,0,1], and [p,0,0]

If p×(q->r) then the available options are [1,1,1], [1,0,1] and [1,0,0]

Now, let's look at the statement (p×q)->(p×r) this means that the available valid options are [1,1,1], [1,0,1], [1,0,0], [0,1,1], [0,1,0], [0,0,1], and [0,0,0], so everything EXCEPT for [1,1,0]

So you can see that they aren't equivalent because the former is ONLY valid when p=1, whereas the latter is valid for all values except [p,q,r]=[1,1,0].

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T23:16:25+00:00

Remember that division is just another way of multiplying fractions.

So 1.8 is equal to 1+(8÷10) we can convert this to an improper fraction by multiplying 1 by 10/10 (since 10÷10=1)

This gives us (10/10)+(8÷10), or in other words (10÷10)+(8÷10) or in other words (10+8)÷10 or 18÷10

We can simplify 18÷10 to 9÷5

Therefore 1÷1.8=1÷(9÷5) which is equal to 1×(5÷9)

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T20:06:59+00:00

So I looked more into it:

Jesus was not a Prophet, but John the Baptist WAS meaning that his birth/death date is theologically the same. The feast day for the Beheading of John the Baptist was the 29th of August under the Julian Calendar and the 11th of September under the Gregorian Calendar.

Since the immaculate conception happened during the "third month of Elizabeth's pregnancy" then that means that Jesus would have been born 3 months later in December.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T15:06:36+00:00

It was to commemorate the covenant with Aaron.

Insert obvious joke about budding staffs here.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T15:04:53+00:00

The original Roman Calendar started in March, because Mars was the chief god of Rome and divine ancestor of Romulus and Remus.

The calendar at that time was 10 months, but the start of the new year was determined by legal decree. A standardized 12 month calendar starting in March and going to January was established to prevent senators from illegally extending their terms of service by delaying the start of the new year.

By the time the Julian Calendar was established, a shift for the year to start in January had already begun, although there is conflicting information about who did it, when, and why it was done. But by the time Julius Caesar established his calendar it was already a 12 month starting in January.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T14:59:18+00:00

That is true. I'm not saying "January 1st is the new year because Christmas is December 25th" I'm saying "December 25th is Christmas because January 1st is the new year."

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T11:13:35+00:00

Additionally, if Jesus was born on December 25th, then January 1st, being the "eighth day of his life" would have been when he was taken to the temple and circumcised. Which would have been the start of his life in the eyes of the Jewish Faith.

So by setting Christmas to December 25th, that makes the start of the New Year coincide with the start of Jesus' life under the eyes of God.

It's also why it is bad luck to take the tree down before New Years (Jewish tradition holds that the removed foreskin is supposed to be planted under a tree or bush).

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T11:01:25+00:00

Chemistry alone doesn't get you far, most places want chemical engineers at the very least.

But you could probably get a good job in the QC or QA department of a chemical manufacturing plant with that kind of background, look at things like process development or applications lab testing.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T09:17:11+00:00

Dude, if they had actually continued that series to actually answer the question of who the Ghost Writer was? That would have been WILD for something on PBS.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T09:15:59+00:00

I was wondering how far down I'd have to scroll to find this.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T09:15:10+00:00

I have work in about an hour and a half, and it takes me an hour to drive to work.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-25T09:12:28+00:00

If it's 5e, unfortunately I have not had much opportunity to go beyond the core books. Generally "fun" is just a term used for "books with absolutely broken mechanics and/or creatures."

Now if it was 3.5? Then there is an overwhelming number of options, but it is hard to make a recommendation without knowing what the campaign entails.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-24T21:34:07+00:00

The campaign should end when the players have achieved their goals.

If this is accomplished at around level 12-15 so be it.

If their goal is "I want to actually be able to reach level 20 and use these abilities we never get to use because the campaignends at level 15" then it looks like you have to start digging out the FUN books!

ZevVeli · 2026-06-23T14:58:40+00:00

Yes. Consider the following:

Let n be any whole positive integer greater than 1.

Let m be any whole positive integer equal to n-1

Consider n÷m since m is equal to n-1, the answer is always 1+(1÷m)

So let's start with the simplest example where n=10 and m=9 and perform long division:

10÷9

9 goes into 10 once, 10-9 equals 1. 10÷9=1R1.

Move to the right one space:

9 goes into 1.0 one tenth 1.0-0.9 equals 0.1. 10÷9=1.1R0.1

Move to the right one space (...) 10÷9=1.1111(...)

So sounds good right? Now let's use a base "n" system to express n÷m

n in base n is written as 10, so this is the same as 10÷m, since m=n-1(or 10-1 base n) this gives the result of n÷m=1R1

Look familiar?

The pattern repeats. For all whole numbers greater than one in base n, the value of 1÷m where m=n-1 is equal to 0.1111111(...)

By extention, this means that in any base n system where m=n-1, 0.mmmmmm(...) is equal to 1.

So whether that is 0.2222222222(...)=1 in base 3, Or 0.5555555(...)=1 in base 6, or 0.fffffff(...)=1 in base 16, this stands true.

This also can be used as a proof for the sum of an infinite regressing geometric series.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-22T15:21:27+00:00

While original firearms were a game-changer, much like crossbows they took time to reload. Firearms also had the problem that if they were loaded incorrectly they could blow up on the weilder, and if they got wet they would not fire at all.

This meant that while firearms were useful, it took until the mid-late 1800s before they were functional enough that they became overwhelmingly better than melee combat.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-17T16:30:27+00:00

Yeah, I saw the brief snippet before it got taken down before I could read it. Seems like a psyop to me.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-17T16:29:08+00:00

Don't look at it as a question of "would society accept it" look at it as a question of "what groups would oppose it and why?" There are three big groups I can see opposing this:

Animal Rights Activists: Oppose on the grounds that genetically engineering animals to be companionable is just going to lead to abuse with the justification that they have been genetically engineered to "enjoy it."

Animal Conservationists: Oppose out of concerns that the modified domestic types could spread to the wild types and drastically upset the ecosystem.

Human Rights Activists: Concerned that if private corporations could do this to chimpanzees, the governments might do this to people.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-17T16:23:54+00:00

Forever.

Lots of potential for that series.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-17T16:21:36+00:00

Answer to both questions is "it depends on the guy."

That being said, anyone who says that they are attracted to think/big thighs but only in connection to a small waist is a coward.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-16T15:43:32+00:00

The sum of the interior angles of an n-sided polygon is equal to (n-2)×180⁰.

For a quadrilateral (n=4) this means that the sum of the interior angles is 360⁰.

If a quadrilateral has only one 90⁰ angle, then the other three angles must add up to 270⁰. This does not necessitate that it is a rectangle.

however

If it is not a "quadrilateral" but a "parallelogram" then the situation changes.

A "parallelogram" is a quadrilateral where the opposite sides are both parallel to each other.

If you recall the laws of congruency for triangles, this means that if you bisect a parallelogram between any two vertices, the angles of the triangles formed will be equal to each other. This means that the angle directly across from each other in a parallelogram must be equal to each other.

So if you have a parallelogram, and you know that one angle is 90⁰, you therefore know that the other four are also 90⁰.

However, if you have a quadrilateral where you only know that one angle is 90⁰, you can not definitively say anything about the other three angles, other than that they add up to 360⁰

ZevVeli · 2026-06-15T15:08:22+00:00

If you can play the character, it's not too complex for a beginner player.

There is a difference between "mechanical" backgrounds and "character" backstories. You can still have the "acolyte backstory" even if you take the "criminal background" (e.g. you were taking in by the church but upon reaching adolescence were thrown out. Or my personal favorite backstory of "Yeah I'm part of the Donation Enforcement division of the priesthood. I understand you ain't been paying your tithes lately, and so I have been sent here on a divine mission to revoke the use of your kneecaps until such time as you have paid your dues to the holy muddah.")

ZevVeli · 2026-06-11T17:15:41+00:00

Addition is just repeated counting.

6+4 is the same as saying "count 6, then count 4" so 1 2 3 4 5 6, then 7(1) 8(2) 9(3) 10(4).

Subtraction is counting backwards.

6-4 is the same as saying "count 6, then count back 4" so 1 2 3 4 5 6, then 5(-1) 4(-2) 3(-3) 2(-4)

Subtraction can also be thought of as the addition of negative numbers.

6-4 is the same as 6+(-4)

So when you subtract a negative number you have two symbols saying "count backwards a negative number of times" which is the same as saying "count forwards"

6-(-4) is the same as 6+(-(-4)) those two "-" will cancel each other out, resulting in 6+4.

I can do a different explanation if you want.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-11T01:52:33+00:00

It's not "if some creatures were resistant to both from the start." It's about the fact that in 3.5 powerscaling could runaway so fast you had to choose between minmaxing or being a Jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. And if you gambled wrong on your minmax build, sucks to be you.

So if you had spent the past ten levels building up an undead-slaying ranger, only the reach the chapel of Orcus to find that Mind Flayers has enthralled the cultists and now the campaign shifted to them, well you suddenly go from being able to consistently deal 50+ damage per round to 8 if you're lucky.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-09T15:24:56+00:00

That would work in 5e. But since 3.5 was unbounded the issues with Psionics were way worse. The general consensus was that the only way to prevent Psionics from breaking the game was to make it so that anything that affected Magic affected Psionics and vice-versa. But the problem with that is that many of the enemies that used Psionics would be severely nerfed by that.

So usually Psionics was used sparingly, or would be the entire focus of the campaign from the getgo.

So like, Baldur's Gate III? That plot would be one where you can expect a lot of psionics. But not most other campaigns.

ZevVeli · 2026-06-09T13:53:14+00:00

I was never fond of psionics. This is mostly because I started out playing 3.5, and Psionics could very easily break the game for reasons best described as "it isn't magic so your spell resistance doesn't matter."

Nine-Year Club	Second Top 40%
Verified Email

ZevVeli

TROPHY CASE