The Masked Orange Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 Tried to post this yesterday, didn't go through, so I'm re-posting it. I am now going to use all logic within my arguments between wrestlers. I am using Brian Kendrick as the absolute standard in which all wreslters must be compared against. Randy Orton is a thirteen times as good as Brian Kendrick. How we came to assuming Randy Orton is thirteen times as good as Kendrick is by the mathmatical process of: World Championships x Title Matches x High Profile Matches + Non-world titles Dodgy Title Runs This is then divided by Embarrising incidents, all rated on a scale of one to ten. Benoit = 10 Triple H = 1 If they have held no championships than those parts of the equation are removed. Same with dodgy title runs, and high profile matches. Than the answer is divided by ten and timesd by pure wrestling ability on a scale of one to ten. 1=Khali 10= Kurt Angle Randy Orton = (((((3 x (18/1)) x 9) + 3)/5)/10) x 8 Randy Orton = 78.24 (For world champs it's fairer to disclude all tag team championships) Brian Kendrick = ((((1 x 2) + 13)/1)/10) x 4 Brian Kendrick = 6 78.24/6 = 13 r 0.24 Randy Orton is thirteen times as good as Brian Kendrick. I figured this out while having a big lack of sleep, so it's not full-proof. But it will take opinoin out of the question. I know, it's math. But I got one of those weird minds were it's second language. And don't think I'm only pasting it cause I got nothing else to do, I've just been out with a large group of friends.
The Masked Orange Posted December 13, 2008 Author Posted December 13, 2008 I just had one of those "friends" saying that when I said he could stay over for a bit he wasn't expecting me to do maths, and how he wants me to go on youtube so we can go on that video that says that it can hypnotise us....
The Masked Orange Posted December 13, 2008 Author Posted December 13, 2008 no you just have a weird mind Yeah, pretty much. I think about this while playing Legend Of Zelda windwaker, and it ended up with the massive worm eating me, so I sorta think odd things when I shouldn't..
Sons of Kohral Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 Math can't solve all things Sorry, I hate math. It's a very interesting concept, but it definitely isn't foolproof. For instance, wrestler who are great but haven't held titles or wrestlers who have held titles on a lot of separate occasions (a la HHH) However, this can be useful for calculating how much of a pop a particular wrestler could have. Bottom Line: Very interesting, and I'll probably use this equation for fun.
Astil Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 Benoit = 10 Triple H = 1 1=Khali 10= Kurt Angle But it will take opinoin out of the question. Two variables based on opinion. So no it doesn't.
BurningHamster Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 I think you have just disproved the entire concept of mathematics. Everyone knows Kendrick is better than Orton.
Self Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 Not a huge fan of your equation. No specific problem. No constructive criticism. I'm just not a massive fan of deciding title matches and World Title runs are on equal footing. Also "Embarrising incidents" is given a value that is purely opinion, which isn't too well placed in scientific mathematics. Also, title run etc is a largely kayfabe, which "Embarrising incidents" is a real life thing. I don't like to mix these. I attribute Championships to Characters, and backstage attitude to performers. Didn't beasts. However, I LOVE mathematics. Not too long ago I thought about using physics to prove which finishing moves are more effective... you know... if they was real. Sadly, it's been a while since I dips my pen in the old mathematical ink, and got bored pretty fast. Maths rule!
shamelessposer Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 full-proof I know we're not supposed to mock the language skills of our fellow posters, but is there any chance an exception could be made for incidents so ironic they threaten to tear our very reality asunder?
Thomnipotent Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 I once read a screwed up book that claimed that 1 was equal to 0. And it had the mathematical backing to prove it, too... screwed up. Anyway, I find that when I argue with Reason, it's really just that I needed to plug a cable into the mixer from Subtractor... Reason is always right, there's no arguing with it. </audio geek mode>
shamelessposer Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 I once read a screwed up book that claimed that 1 was equal to 0. And it had the mathematical backing to prove it, too... screwed up. 0.999... (nines going on into infinity) is equal to 1.
Thomnipotent Posted December 13, 2008 Posted December 13, 2008 I should really find the math for you, Shameless. The book was called Zero: A Dangerous Concept. Something like that, at least. Check it out from your local bookhaus.
Astil Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 My math http://www.heaven.org.au/blogs/heretics/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/proof_that_girls_are_evil.jpg
shamelessposer Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 Sorry, Astil, but I think I've got you beat. http://beconfused.com/images/2007/01/no-there-is-an-elephant-in-the-way.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v341/shamelessposer/Hotlinked/mathloljj0.png Also, fun with SCIENCE!: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v341/shamelessposer/Hotlinked/cat.jpg
Guest The Aussie Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 Here's a fun one. http://www.claytoncramer.com/pictures/testanswers/expand.jpg
Astil Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 http://www.channel4.com/media/userpages/accepted/673589_find_x_lol.jpg
Actarus Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 http://www.channel4.com/media/userpages/accepted/673589_find_x_lol.jpg 5 cm
Astil Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 5 cm Of course, it's a 3-4-5 but yeah I digress.
Actarus Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 Of course, it's a 3-4-5 but yeah I digress. I liked the girls = evil better. And Thom is right; there ARE ways to have 1 = 0 going through a bunch of mathematical operations. The more basic ways are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_proof I have a friend that was able to get 1=0 without derivatives, going through a ton of algebra. I'm sure there was a subtle rule that was overlooked but at the time, it was pretty neat.
cappyboy Posted December 14, 2008 Posted December 14, 2008 I have a friend that was able to get 1=0 without derivatives, going through a ton of algebra. I'm sure there was a subtle rule that was overlooked but at the time, it was pretty neat. Okay, you know what? I'm going to go over there now. ::points toward his e-mail box:: All of a sudden you scare me.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.