Azure79 Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 I always think, can I drink it or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musopticon? Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 It's nearly empty, the glass is ****en ugly and the stuff inside is not worth drinking anyway. *cuts himself* Seriously though, it's usually half full, has a silver lining and looks on the bright side. kirottu said: I was raised by polar bears. I had to fight against blood thirsty wolves and rabid penguins to get my food. Those who were too weak to survive were sent to Sweden. It has made me the man I am today. A man who craves furry hentai. So let us go and embrace the rustling smells of unseen worlds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 Today the glass seems half full, but I have relatives coming to visit later, so that might change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astr0creep Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 I believe in Philip Glass. He must be full of *something* http://entertainmentandbeyond.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 somebody needs to point out that an exactly half full, half empty, or any specific measure, glass is not possible to achieve. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 (edited) somebody needs to point out that an exactly half full, half empty, or any specific measure, glass is not possible to achieve. taks Leave Heisenburg out of this. It's possible to achieve. Just not possible to verify. edit: tale Edited July 9, 2007 by Tale "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 it's not about heisenberg. statistically speaking, there will _always_ be measurement error, even if the measurement is capable of reaching an atomic count (which would then be counting error). oddly, if you could count atoms, your accuracy would be at a minimum +/- 1/2 of an atom (though probably higher). wrap around that for a bit. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 (edited) it's not about heisenberg. statistically speaking, there will _always_ be measurement error, even if the measurement is capable of reaching an atomic count (which would then be counting error). oddly, if you could count atoms, your accuracy would be at a minimum +/- 1/2 of an atom (though probably higher). wrap around that for a bit. taks Well, your argument is the same principle as Heisenburg in this case. You're speaking difficulty measuring, not physically impossible. Which means it's not impossible, just highly unlikely, and impossible to verify. I would think the more difficult, and possibly what would make it impossible, is if the volume held by a glass is not evenly divided by the volume of water molocules at that pressure. Captain Kirk Edited July 9, 2007 by Tale "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirottu Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I believe Jy Kon Star is Eddo This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I believe the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgon Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Whats so positive about a glass that is half full. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Whats so positive about a glass that is half full. You're focusing on presence as opposed to focusing on absence. "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 It is still the same amount of water. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 The glass is completely full. Half with water, half with air. What do I win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Architect Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) {Deleted what I previously said in this post of mine}. Edited July 10, 2007 by The Architect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walsingham Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Half empty. I hate my life. There there. It could be half empty of something like bile. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diogo Ribeiro Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Who cares about the glass? Just pass me the bottle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Who cares about the glass? Just pass me the bottle. You know, I rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Who cares about the glass? Just pass me the bottle. Hefeweizen is meant to be drunk out of a glass. However, if that bottle is whiskey... "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Well, your argument is the same principle as Heisenburg in this case. You're speaking difficulty measuring, not physically impossible. Which means it's not impossible, just highly unlikely, and impossible to verify. no, it is NOT a difficulty of measuring. it is simply a statistical nuance that makes precise measurement impossible, not just difficult. it is a statistical issue alone. there is _always_ statistical error in _any_ measurement, be it counting or otherwise. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) Well, your argument is the same principle as Heisenburg in this case. You're speaking difficulty measuring, not physically impossible. Which means it's not impossible, just highly unlikely, and impossible to verify. no, it is NOT a difficulty of measuring. it is simply a statistical nuance that makes precise measurement impossible, not just difficult. it is a statistical issue alone. there is _always_ statistical error in _any_ measurement, be it counting or otherwise. taks Poor wording on my part. Impossibility measuring does not prevent impossibility of occurance. I never meant to imply that atomically accurate measurement could occur in this case. Edited July 10, 2007 by Tale "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) Yeah, but what I'm getting from Tale is that the glass could be half full, even if we cannot measure it. I see Tale beat me to it by a breath. Edited July 10, 2007 by Cantousent Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 i'll buy that. still improbable, however, as the surface of any liquid is rather dynamic. a facetious jest in any case. i was being that technical simply because somebody needed to be. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krookie Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 it is a statistical issue alone. there is _always_ statistical error in _any_ measurement, be it counting or otherwise. taks So if I have a box, and I put a spoon in it, and I say "There is one spoon in this box", I'm wrong? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 it is a statistical issue alone. there is _always_ statistical error in _any_ measurement, be it counting or otherwise. taks So if I have a box, and I put a spoon in it, and I say "There is one spoon in this box", I'm wrong? I'm confused. You actually have 1.1 spoons. "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now