Humor is the second derivative of comprehension with respect to time

Invitation
1. From Axiom 2 and Axiom 6, we conclude that comprehension (Q) is subject to a rate of change.
(∀K (∃K∃t1∃t2 ∧ K(t1)

Other urls found in this thread:

therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/jose-mujica-net-worth/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

6. From Axiom 8, we note that it may be insisted that comedy = humor. But from Axiom 7, we require that comedy ≠ humor if a different relation between A and B may be argued instead.
7. From Axiom 9, we require that for any comprehension Q there exists a desire I:Q. This desire represents not the amount of comprehension, but rather, an approval: the desire for what is being comprehended.
ⱯK, ∃I∈I ⇒ ∃(I:K)
ⱯQ, ∃I ⇒ ∃(I:Q)
8. From Axiom 10 and Axiom 2, we require there exists a rate of change of this desire.
ⱯK∃I:K∃t1∃t2 ∧ I:K(t1)

Axioms

1. I think, therefore ∃I∈I.
2. Being that nothing exists that changes and is discontinuous, and so, nothing exists that is not differentiable, that which exists and changes is subject to a rate of change, or a derivative.
∀K (∃K∃t1∃t2 ∧ K(t1)

Woah take this to your local university's philosophy department and show it to some professors they'll be really impressed they might even give you a tenured professorship!

Is this what peak autism looks like ?

I answered the millennia-old question: "what is humor?"

I'll accept your autism.

tl dr knowledge differential

...

>one of mankind’s most perplexing questions
>some autist answers it in a Lybian throat singing collective forum
Ok

no

Ad hominem

>that image

it takes a few minutes to lear how to type this in Laτεχ fuck off

Very true. Thank you for the advice. It is hard to get people to look long enough to advise.

I have this all in an .odt but I guess it will not be found legitimate if not latex.

I'll get on it when I'm back from work.

冷漠 - 西蒙博士的知識差異,冷漠
冷漠 - 西蒙博士,冷漠的知識差異

I hate this overuse of "=", like bullshit that money=power, people don't understand that equality is symmetric so you have to be able to say that power=money, also, which is clearly not true. You didn't do this and you forgot a +C in an indefinite integral and you're autistic.

show me an example of a poor person with real power

i'll wait

Ghandi, the Dalai Lama, Che Guevara, Mother Teresa, Gregor Mendel, nearly all recent Popes, Jose Mujica, and Edward Snowden to start.

>ghandi
a literal street shitter, no power
>dalai lama
isn't even allowed in his own home
>che guevara
got shot in the woods doing grunt work: no power
>mother theresa
lmao what the fuck do you think I mean by real power
>gregor mendel
POWER. POWER. WHAT DO YOU THINK POWER MEANS
>the fucking pope
technically took a vow of poverty, in reality has a golden crown, golden sceptor, lives in a palace, and has his own private army
>jose mujica
therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/jose-mujica-net-worth/
>edward snowden
can't leave his house he's imprisoned in, no power

>Che Guevara
>had a few Rolex watches
>poor
You don't understand how socialism works.

But everything I said is built off of definitions. If I say in a mathematical proof "Let X = 2Y", then X=2Y, dammit. That's just how proofs work.

I said let humor be the desire to increase punch: a pursuit. So then for the duration of this document, humor is I:(R|P), my desire to increase that real number (R being bold face R) representing punch. That much has to be permitted me for the duration of the document!

The question is, now, is this first derivative of comprehension, punch, really what humor seeks to pursue? Because if it is, I have spoken some very important words.


I am not interested in any algebraic treatment of the word "money".

X=2Y

匿名在綠色文字大家! 通過非法渠道等4個轉換綠色文本黑色文本!