Log in

No account? Create an account
"Like a graveyard...
... people dig me"
Because if murnkay does it, it has to be good 
16th-May-2006 09:59 am
Embrace the Penguin!
Today is ask me anything day.

So go to it. And if you have multiple questions, go to it again and again!
16th-May-2006 02:38 pm (UTC)
How do you feel about the magically disabled reclaiming the use of the word "m*ggle", most recently noted in phrases such as "Word up, mugga" and "Mugga what?!"?
16th-May-2006 02:55 pm (UTC)
I feel that if they're going to do that, then they should be more forgiving of the magically gifted calling them mugga, since its what they call each other, and, after all, it is distinct from muggle.
16th-May-2006 03:45 pm (UTC)
Two questions!
[1] If we got married, would you wear a wedding band?
[2] If either of us got married a second time, where would we wear the new ring? [Double up on one finger?]
16th-May-2006 04:06 pm (UTC)
1) Oh I guess. Seriously, though, I'm enough of a traditionalist to respect that one. Someone's going to have to teach me how to wear and care for rings, though.
2) First, let's get it legalized. Then we'll talk.
16th-May-2006 05:08 pm (UTC)
If you'd feel uncomfotable wearing a wedding band, you don't have to. I like trying rings on you, but I don't expect you to ever wear one.

Gah, poly marriage activism is weird though when you're not a test case. I feel like no one would want to listen unless you can show off your multiple spouses already.
16th-May-2006 05:20 pm (UTC)
It would take some getting used to, but I could deal. And it would be not a problem.

Point taken. Do we have any takers in here? The only concern is that Bigamy is a crime, remember?
16th-May-2006 04:32 pm (UTC)

*blink blink*
16th-May-2006 05:18 pm (UTC)
Do you like to blink?
16th-May-2006 04:10 pm (UTC)
Hang out the next time I'm in NY? :P
16th-May-2006 05:18 pm (UTC)
Of course!
16th-May-2006 10:09 pm (UTC)
How can you prove that π2 is irrational?
17th-May-2006 01:36 pm (UTC)
We know from earlier proofs that π is irrational. It Stands To Reason1, that a number with no representation p/q (for p, q ∈ Z) could not have a representation p2/q2.

1 "It Stands To Reason" means it's intuitively correct, but I have no idea how to prove it. Sorry.
17th-May-2006 02:00 pm (UTC)
It Stands To Reason, that a number with no representation p/q (for p, q ∈ Z) could not have a representation p^2/q^2.

I thought so too, until it was pointed out to me that sqrt(2) is irrational. It might have something to do with transcendentality.... Hm....
17th-May-2006 02:33 pm (UTC)
Ah! Yes, I would expect that the transcendentality would be a better place to look. After all, the fact that π cannot be the solution of an algebraic equation is a very weird one, and probably where you can find it, but I'm out of proof practice, and sleepy, and at work. Why don't you have your students do it for extra credit work ;-)
This page was loaded Dec 17th 2018, 6:18 am GMT.