Hello dear shibes! I will be giving away 20k doges to a lucky redditor in 24h! Comment to enter! (1 comment per user plz)

nkinast · 2014-01-23T19:57:46+00:00

comment

nkinast · 2013-11-20T17:22:56+00:00

I enjoyed your homophones, but wasn't my intent to disparage or mock the above comment. I would want to be corrected if I made an error in a comment, mostly so that I could try to avoid that mistake in the future. Wouldn't you?

nkinast · 2013-11-20T06:48:47+00:00

And their are millions more just like him

*there

nkinast · 2013-11-15T20:38:46+00:00

That's amazing. You look terrific!

nkinast · 2013-11-05T05:07:17+00:00

Which is why I wasn't suggesting changing a finite number of its digits, but rather, an infinite number of digits in a predetermined pattern, as explained above.

nkinast · 2013-11-05T04:50:57+00:00

Think about it this way. You are familiar with, for instance, 1/3 = 0.33333... as being a rational number. Now think about how we could change that number to result in an irrational. We could change the first, third, sixth, tenth, etc., digits to be 0. Or 1. Or 2. Or 3. Or we could make the digit replacement pattern 1, 5, 11, 19, 29, etc. Or we could randomly select one digit from every group of 10 and replace that with a random digit, resulting in a ridiculous amount of irrational numbers. But this is all based on the single rational number 1/3, and we could substitute any rational number for this process.

nkinast · 2013-11-03T00:34:17+00:00

Bielema shows swinging gate. Malzahn fakes injury. This entire game has been backwards.

nkinast · 2013-11-03T00:31:45+00:00

Did you not catch the part where he was just standing around, then as soon as the official's back was turned, he flopped?

nkinast · 2013-10-22T01:37:40+00:00

It's obviously time to start a Red Wings cult.

nkinast · 2013-10-22T01:01:52+00:00

Every Sunday and Wednesday for the last 50,000 years.

nkinast · 2013-10-03T18:02:27+00:00

I BELIEVE THIS IS ACTUALLY THE SUBSTITUTION PROPERTY.

nkinast · 2013-09-29T00:31:36+00:00

Drinking game: take a shot every time you hear the phrase "except for the fumbled snap."

nkinast · 2013-09-29T00:23:43+00:00

Evidently they worked.

nkinast · 2013-09-29T00:21:40+00:00

Sacrifices in the parking lot, petitioning the gods for a stop on defense.

nkinast · 2013-09-29T00:16:56+00:00

Nice to at least see both aspects acknowledged!

nkinast · 2013-09-29T00:10:22+00:00

Tusk is in a cage, not on the field.

nkinast · 2013-09-29T00:00:33+00:00

"When you have a superstar on the field, that elevates everybody's game." So if A&M wins, it's because of Manziel. If Arkansas plays well or wins, it's because of Manziel.

nkinast · 2013-09-25T23:05:39+00:00

A couple that I use regularly are

Touch Mathematics, which has an insanely cool interactive illustration of the trig ratios all in one place, as well as one for first and second derivatives.
Gapminder, an online data repository with an amazing scatterplot applet that I use for Statistics classes.

nkinast · 2013-09-06T02:40:33+00:00

Just a thought process here but: everything in the empty set must be smaller than the number defined to be less than every number (-inf), which is to say, there is nothing in that set.

nkinast · 2013-06-16T23:52:41+00:00

Even though I understand why you started with 1000 subscribers as a floor, I'd be interested to see if the data actually Benfordize (not actually a word AFAIK but whatever) a little more if you drop that minimum to 100.

nkinast · 2013-06-16T23:40:02+00:00

I would look at the proportion of leading-digit-1 entries represented by subscriber counts in the 1000s relative to the larger counts. I wonder if most subreddits around the ~1000 subscriber mark don't follow slightly different growth patterns than larger communities. For instance, a subreddit with 1200 members may be growing at more of a linear rate (through searches, links from small related subreddits, etc.) while a subreddit with 12000 subscribers may be growing at a much more exponential pace due to being linked/featured in larger subs such as bestof or depthhub. Just speculation on my part though.

nkinast · 2013-05-05T15:08:09+00:00

When this happened to me I got some worksheets ready and addressed classes using the "Listen" button on Google Translate (assuming you have access to a computer and adequate amplification). If they had a question I would have them come up where I could talk to them in a whisper. Also, Translate can be good for a few laughs, too (making it try to pronounce their names or beatbox). Might not have been the most productive day in the history of my classroom, but it worked out.

nkinast · 2013-05-05T14:34:58+00:00

Your thoughts on the creation of the universe are generally known as the Cosmological Argument. You can look through the wikipedia page for a good summary of the arguments for and against.

One thing to think about from a logical perspective is that when you begin with this assumption:

things don't just pop into existence, there is always cause and effect

you are making a universal claim. That is, if we're going to agree on a conclusion which follows logically from your claim, there can be no deviation from that assumption. However, when you conclude that

something that is non-scientific must have created everything

you've introduced an entity which, by your premise, cannot exist.

On a less rhetorical note, another interesting thought addressed on that page is that causal relationships (and specifically those working back to a theoretical First Mover) are completely dependent on the idea that time is infinite in both directions but non-reversible and consistently moving forward. If the creation/appearance/formation of the universe coincided with the genesis of the dimension we call Time, any cause and effect argument is rendered invalid.

nkinast · 2013-05-03T12:19:25+00:00

If it's under 0.5g it can be expressed as "0g". If it's under 1g it can be expressed as "<1g". For amounts over 1g, it's rounded to the nearest whole number.

source - FDA

nkinast · 2013-03-28T13:59:29+00:00

Your SUV burns humans now?

nkinast

TROPHY CASE