« Previous OKAY DAVE | THIS Next »
YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU PUT YOUR MIND TO!
except develop an algorithm that determines if an arbitrary turning machine halts simultaneously measure the momentum and position of a particle with product of their errors less than half of the reduced Planck constant, or develop a recursively enumerable sex of axioms powerful enough to define Peano arithmetic while being both complete and consistent.
 | rounder5150 on SINCE WHEN |
 | Odeon on SORRY |
| Odeon on SORRY |
 | akjngflkfzsn dczlmn on SUDOKU: THE WORD PROBLEM |
 | Ed on MISERY |
 | UnNimeni on FAMILIARITY |
 | PaMu1337 on THAT IS A DS |
 | TcheQ on SEEMS LEGIT |
 | ShadowQuest on …BUT PHYSICS RULES! |
 | Doug on LET THE GAMES BEGIN |
Memebase - All Your Memes Are In Our Base
This Is Photobomb - Surprise! Ruined Photos 
GraphJam - Music & Culture for People Who Love Charts
Señor Gif - Funny Animated GIFs
Picture Is Unrelated - Funny WTF Pictures 
Comixed - Vertical 4 Pane Comics 
Derp - All the Derp Durr Hurr that's fit to Derp
Art of Trolling - Trolls on Chatroulette and Yahoo! Answers
Go Cry Emo Kid - Go Cry Emo Kids
Superheroes - Superheroes
Rage Comics - Express Your Rage
Pokémemes - I choose you!
Picture by: 
Now that is something really demotivational, I almost got TL;DR’d
They lost me after “ANYTHING”
they lost me at “you”
Meh! I can live with that!
TL;DR.
tl; dr ..
what does tl; dr mean?
“Too long; didn’t read.”
tl;dr wut does it mean…?
but on memebase, you can!
memebase- not even once
Let me guess… troll science?
isn’t easier telling a mathematician to divide by zero
just tell a mathematician that infinity divided by infinity is one.
5 divided by 5 = 5
0 divided by 0 = 1
sqrt(-1) divided sqrt(-1) = 1
You fool! Now that you used that mathematical Candlejack, we are al-
I’ve never tried it actually.
TL;DR
inb4 too long didn’t read
TL;DW
(too late; didn’t work)
thank you for clarifying.
Agreed
TL;DR
> turning machine
and it’s right on the poster -_-
No, just no
Turing*
Named after Alan Turing if I’m not mistaken.
Challenge accepted.
Beat me to it.
And I.
…can’t even finish a sentence.
“recursively enumerable sex of axioms”
true, nobody can come up with that.
And the measurement thing is accurate too, due to the Uncertainty Principle.
I love how the image assumes that P != NP, yet nobody proved that yet.
P=NP entails complexity, how we can perform computations. The halting problem on whethere such computations can be performed at all!
The halting problem is unsolvable by both deterministic and non-deterministic turing machines (or equivalent)
Unless P=NP, then all bets are off.
The fact that we still haven’t proven this right or wrong might be an indicator that P!=NP.
Problem?
That’s hardly a proof.
That sounds like a heuristic approach
Nope. All these statements are true if P=NP.
P=NP is just about the existence of fast algorithms, not the existence of algorithms at all.
Actually no.
I once proved P=NP in an exam. Those damn teachers gave me a zero (D in some countries) instead of being in awe at my awesomeness.
To be fair, it was a medieval lit class.
You win, sir.
Challenge accepted.
Actually they have a machine that can solve the Halting Problem, unfortunately it involves falling into a black hole.
or develop perpetual motion without troll science.
weak. just weak.
TLDR
ok who did really read that whole text
MAKE SHORTER LOLZ!
You consider that long?
This world is doomed.
Agreed.
very true
I await your suggestion of a more economical way to state the incompleteness theorem…
a recursively enumerable sex of axioms
If somebody goes to all the trouble to re-type what we can see perfectly clearly, why can’t they do it right?
tl;dr
TL;DR
The answer is 42
Lol
i would have to say that we are not certain about the uncertainty principle… in physics you cant prove anything…it might be wrong. everything else however…
I assume you mean you can’t prove anything, by which you are wrong, You can prove a lot of things in physics. Don’t be so stupid, learn to write and don’t use… so much.
he probably just read Descartes in philosophy class
It isn’t that we can’t. We just haven’t done it yet.
Hahaha… the irony is epic.
The entire point of this post is that, in fact, all these things really are impossible. For example, you can prove that the halting problem (the one about Turing machines) is undecidable.
ie, an undeniable mathematical proof exists that it is, in fact, impossible to solve every instance of the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
I think the poster of this lukewarm meme is trying to show off that he went to collage and using $10 words to a $2 conversation.
I went to collage and I didn’t learn any $10 words. All I got was a bunch of worthless magazine clippings, and they were all stuck together…
are you just jealous because you couldn’t get into college because you couldn’t spell it right?
Huh? I did that last week, but it was so underground you’ve probably not heard about it
too long didnt read
What is this I don’t even.
Oh, I get it now! It’s a collage of ten-dollar words! Srsly, tho, funny if overblown…
touche.
I was gonna say that .(
Didn’t you get your posts blocked for such lewd sayings?
I thought so too.
You actually think you can stop rusty?
You are not rusty, I am the real rusty!!!!!!11one
To all of the above:
TL; DR
I don’t know what rusty is.
I am Mormon.
the preceding statements are apparently inextricably linked. Which, in my opinion, is a very good thing.
he/she obviously didn’t put his/her mind to it
You are correct, I cannot. However, if Chuck Norris and MacGyver worked together, they could.
Sorry, they would still need Stephen Hawking.
Chuck Norris can do this sh*t alone!
And Artemis Fowl!
Challenge accepted.
this. This was what i was expecting in the comments. +1 for fulfilling my dreams.
TL,DR
Did anyone else hear that in Sheldon’s voice?
You still looking for the old European guy to fondle your really tiny penis and put an umbrella inside of you? Maybe that’s the source of your frustration.
Or make an acute triangle that has side measurements that are all perfect squares.
How about drawing a triangle on a planar surface such that the sum of the angles exceeds 180 degrees?
1, 1, 1? 4,4,4? 9,9,9? Need I continue?
An acute triangle, not an equilateral triangle.
An equilateral triangle is an acute triangle.
TL;DR
tl;dr….but i bet Chuck Norris can
Stop complaining. This site seems geared to the college crowd, and it’s not as if the halting paradox, the uncertainty principle, or the incompleteness theorem are unknown to the general scientifically literate population.
Also, P=NP is a whole other kettle of fish – that is a problem that has not been solved. The three examples cited above are different, they are fundamentally undoable. Like finding the second even prime number (although less obviously so).
There’s a SECOND even prime number? I thought “2″ was the only one…
You’re right, and that’s the point. It is easy to prove that every prime number larger than 2 must be odd. It is somewhat harder to prove that every consistent recursively enumerable axiomatization of Peano arithmetic must be incomplete. But both of these things are proven absolutely.
The second of these things is sufficiently non-obvious that from the mid-nineteenth century (when mathematics reached the level of sophistication needed to start considering the concepts in the statement) until the 1920s (with Godel’s incompleteness theorem), it was one of the main goals of mathematics to discover a complete and consistent axiomatization of arithmetic. When Godel proved that this could not be done – that such an axiomatization literally could not exist, it was quite controversial, as it went against the intuitions of many smart people.
However, the point stands. The proof is as solid as the proof that there are no even primes above 2, even if the result is, even now, slightly surprising.
These two examples (the trivial observation about even primes and the non-trivial incompleteness theorem) stand as testimony that anyone who says that “you can’t prove a negative” (in addition to being self-refuting) doesn’t know what they are talking about.
Oh, and my apologies if you were joking…
I was serious. Thanks for the explanation.
WTL;DR
TL;DR
TL;DR
I’m sure I could do that… if i put my mind to it. but it was too long so i didn’t even bother reading it
very good, please also append “or travel faster than light in a vacuum”
Add “without the aid of wormholes” and you’re good.
(Although that’s technically not superluminal travel, it’s just shortening the effective distance between point A and B so it *looks* like you’re going faster than light.)
without the aid of the drive suggested by Alcubierre, would be better, as you are moving faster than light, but not in a local sense, as the space around you is moving, and light in the space will move faster than you.
TL;DR
Yes.
I just simply hate this motto. Thank you for trolling it.
to long did not read
Spelling and punctuation seem to be a problem also.
Um, what? What errors are there in the poster?
I’m not smart enough to get this demotivation
my head hurts
… or win a land war in Asia in the winter
I think it’s. . . You don’t really. . . uh, . . . . . . . What?!
…indeed
The kid in orange looks like my cousin…
Heinsenberg’s and Gödel’s…
Only if the force constant of the quark can reach quantum velocity, can the axiom be powerful enough to remain constant, while still achieving mass, but it has to be at least 80% of the speed of light or better, gravity being constant. 1.21 jigawatts!
I guess he also forgot to add:
Develop an axiomatic set that can quantify the various orders of infinity; prove that every even integer (>2) can be expressed as a sum of two prime numbers; visualize n-dimensional space for n>3, n-infinity.
or divide by zero.
or fly.
or be a normal person.
or get a life.
There’s a lot of things you can’t do, n00b!
Hey all you non-white kids out there. Do not even try to do anything because if the white kids can do anything they want except develop that algorithm, then there’s no hope for you at all.
TL;DR
TL;DR is so mainstream. I read it fully.
http://cdn0.knowyourmeme.com/i/000/115/311/original/130301750275.gif?1303214557
I bet some idiot will go and try this then realise it isnt possible
being able to understand this all makes me feel smart…. maybe that catnip actually DOES do something to the human mind… O.o
I recognised ‘Planck’s Constant’ and that was it
CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!!
TL; DR
TO LONG DIDN’T READ LOLOLOLOLOLOL
^this
Sure, there’s ALWAYS a smartass physicist heckler in the crowd, isn’t there?
COULDN’T HAVE SAID THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE.
[2(PRS-RpX) - CaYu.P]=Xy3.1489p
Challenge Accepted!