View previous topic | View next topic

Urinating

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

violetriga
99662.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:30 am Reply with quote

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1474158.ece

Quote:
A local decision that schoolboys must sit on toilet seats when urinating has provoked political debate.

...boys at Dvergsnes School in Kristiansand have to sit and pee.

 
Mr Grue
99668.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:36 am Reply with quote

Having cleaned the floors of toilets at a boys' schools with a circular floor scrubber I can testify that it's probably much more hygienic to sit. Not that a little wee ever did anyone any harm.

It's urinals I can't stand (IYETP), having once used one at school wearing a pair of shorts.

 
Pyriform
99672.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:42 am Reply with quote

Quote:
"When boys are not allowed to pee in the natural way, the way boys have done for generations, it is meddling with God's work," Kleppe told the newspaper.

"It is a human right not to have to sit down like a girl," Kleppe said.


Girls not being real humans, obviously.

 
djgordy
99677.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:44 am Reply with quote

I'm not sure that

Quote:
Kleppe accuses the school of fiddling with God's work,"


was the best turn of phrase to be used when discussing schoolboy's toilet habits.

 
roamingfree
99777.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:13 pm Reply with quote

perhaps some manner of practical exam is called for, if suitable accuracy is demonstrated, you may use the toilet however you so wish....

 
Celebaelin
99832.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:40 pm Reply with quote

roamingfree wrote:
a sig.

Working towards chaos is like fucking for virinity.

Discuss.

 
roamingfree
99839.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:01 pm Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
roamingfree wrote:
a sig.

Working towards chaos is like fucking for virinity.

Discuss.


I assume you mean virginity. To discuss, chaos is a well defined mathematical concept, which consequently can be studied, and chaotic behaviour easily modelled. fucking for virinity (sic) is just stupid.

 
Celebaelin
99840.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:08 pm Reply with quote

I didn't ask you to define Chaos, which would seem by its very nature to be a tad on the tricky side anyway, I compared striving to achieve Chaos with humping to achieve 'virinity' (virginity indeed, but that's Chaos for you) which is its own explanation, or lack thereof.

Defining Chaos is, surely, ultimately impossible?

 
djgordy
99845.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:17 pm Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:


Defining Chaos is, surely, ultimately impossible?


Evidently not.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=chaos

 
roamingfree
99847.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:26 pm Reply with quote

Not really, most non-linear systems exhibit chaotic behaviour, as such, a set of very simple equations can define a chaotic system --- one of the classical examples is to take an abitrary 4 digit number & square it, then take the four most significant digits. repeat. depending on your choice of seed you get chaotic behaviour from a deterministic equation.

eg
1243.
1545
2387
5697.
3245.
1053
1108
1227
1505
2265
5130
Modern mathematics is obsessed with the study of chaos because if effects us all so much, so reaching for the random is what academics across the globe are doing.

(ps if you want to mess with a physicist's head, ask them for a closed form of the above sequence)

 
Celebaelin
99848.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:28 pm Reply with quote

Futile then; a meaningless definition that satisfies the definer without explaining the concept. A pointless, self-indulgent and officious piece of semantics which has no ultimate meaning?

roamingfree wrote:
...you get chaotic behaviour from a deterministic equation.

By pre-defining rules you abdicate any association with Chaos, which is my point.

You have defined the relationship between those numbers already in your spurious claim that they are not related.

 
roamingfree
99850.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:39 pm Reply with quote

A system is said to be chaotic if it is

topologically mixing,
sensitive to initial conditions,
and has dense periodic orbits

the weather satisfies these three conditions, are you saying it is "A pointless, self-indulgent and officious piece of semantics which has no ultimate meaning?" to say that the weather is chaotic?

 
Celebaelin
99852.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:43 pm Reply with quote

It is in as much as you might, it seems, claim to have defined weather by a lack of ability to definitively describe it.

 
roamingfree
99853.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:45 pm Reply with quote

There is no part of the statement that says it cannot be described.

 
roamingfree
99854.  Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:45 pm Reply with quote

perhaps you feel that the met office reports appear as if by magic?

 

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group