Commercial Signatures

General discussion of Anime Music Videos
trythil
is
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:54 am
Status: N͋̀͒̆ͣ͋ͤ̍ͮ͌ͭ̔̊͒ͧ̿
Location: N????????????????
Org Profile

Re: Post subjects are a waste of time

Post by trythil » Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:11 am

Xanthrax wrote:
EarthCurrent wrote:A mathematical proof?

If ANIME may be placed on the GD,
but ANIMATION may not be placed on the GD,
then ANIME ≠ ANIMATION?

:shock:
No, just that the two aren't equivalent. Anime is a subset of animation, but animation is not a subset of anime. That is to say, whilst all anime is animation, not all animation is anime. So if the Golden Doughnut required the footage to be anime, there would be no inconsistency to ban other animation.
Damn, I knew that there had to be a use for all that set theory I studied :P

User avatar
Kenmakiryu
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 2:32 am
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Org Profile

Post by Kenmakiryu » Wed Dec 31, 2003 12:02 pm

Well, I meant no offense by calling it the 'doughnut deal'.

But, I'll probably keep calling it that since I always put 'deal' at the end of anything that seems like a deal. Anything good, I always add 'deal' to.
Boo-yah!

User avatar
Ruinku
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:24 am
Org Profile

Post by Ruinku » Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:26 pm

alright call of the sniper he's on the good side :p
the Past is Indestrctible

EarthCurrent
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:27 pm
Org Profile

Re: Post subjects are a waste of time

Post by EarthCurrent » Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:34 pm

Xanthrax wrote:No, just that the two aren't equivalent. Anime is a subset of animation, but animation is not a subset of anime. That is to say, whilst all anime is animation, not all animation is anime. So if the Golden Doughnut required the footage to be anime, there would be no inconsistency to ban other animation.
*untrusting* Let's see the formula... :?

trythil
is
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:54 am
Status: N͋̀͒̆ͣ͋ͤ̍ͮ͌ͭ̔̊͒ͧ̿
Location: N????????????????
Org Profile

Re: Post subjects are a waste of time

Post by trythil » Thu Jan 01, 2004 6:10 am

EarthCurrent wrote:
Xanthrax wrote:No, just that the two aren't equivalent. Anime is a subset of animation, but animation is not a subset of anime. That is to say, whilst all anime is animation, not all animation is anime. So if the Golden Doughnut required the footage to be anime, there would be no inconsistency to ban other animation.
*untrusting* Let's see the formula... :?
Xanthrax wrote: Anime is a subset of animation, but animation is not a subset of anime.
A and B are equivalent if and only if A is a subset of B and B is a subset of A.

At least that's the definition I learned in discrete math. Linguists seem to define sets A, B equivalent iff they contain the same number of elements, which isn't the same thing.

User avatar
Corran
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:40 pm
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by Corran » Thu Jan 01, 2004 1:13 pm

Dokool and Krypton-Knight seem easy to tick off with trivia name calling. :roll: :wink:

User avatar
Deaths_ally
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 12:05 am
Location: A hole in the floor
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Post subjects are a waste of time

Post by Deaths_ally » Thu Jan 01, 2004 5:18 pm

trythil wrote: A and B are equivalent if and only if A is a subset of B and B is a subset of A.

At least that's the definition I learned in discrete math. Linguists seem to define sets A, B equivalent iff they contain the same number of elements, which isn't the same thing.
*head spins.. passes out*

trythil
is
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:54 am
Status: N͋̀͒̆ͣ͋ͤ̍ͮ͌ͭ̔̊͒ͧ̿
Location: N????????????????
Org Profile

Re: Post subjects are a waste of time

Post by trythil » Thu Jan 01, 2004 9:12 pm

Deaths_ally wrote:
trythil wrote: A and B are equivalent if and only if A is a subset of B and B is a subset of A.

At least that's the definition I learned in discrete math. Linguists seem to define sets A, B equivalent iff they contain the same number of elements, which isn't the same thing.
*head spins.. passes out*
It's pretty simple, actually.

Take sets A, B from the set of all positive integers:

A = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
B = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}

Is A a subset of B? Yes, A is a subset of B. (It's not a proper subset of B, since A is B, but a subset can include the entire set.)
Is B a subset of A? Again, yes. So A = B, and B = A.

Let's try this again:

A = {1, 2, 3}
B = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}

Is A a subset of B? Yes, because A is {1, 2, 3}, and B is {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}.
Is B a subset of A? No, because B contains elements that are not in A -- namely, 4 and 5. So A is not equal to B, and B is not equal to A.

This isn't really a proof of the statement "sets A and B are equal to each other if A is a subset of B and B is a subset of A", but it does demonstrate how the statement works.

User avatar
Ruinku
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:24 am
Org Profile

Post by Ruinku » Thu Jan 01, 2004 9:45 pm

what that means in english
animation is a catagory and anime is a specific type of animation

basically its like two cups
animation is a big cup and anime is a smaller cup
you can fit the small cup into the big cup but you can't fit the big cup into the smaller cup
the Past is Indestrctible

User avatar
Mr Pilkington
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2002 4:10 pm
Status: Stay outa my shed
Location: Well, hey, you, you should stop being over there and be over here!
Org Profile

Re: Post subjects are a waste of time

Post by Mr Pilkington » Thu Jan 01, 2004 9:59 pm

trythil wrote:
Deaths_ally wrote:
trythil wrote: A and B are equivalent if and only if A is a subset of B and B is a subset of A.

At least that's the definition I learned in discrete math. Linguists seem to define sets A, B equivalent iff they contain the same number of elements, which isn't the same thing.
*head spins.. passes out*
It's pretty simple, actually.

Take sets A, B from the set of all positive integers:

A = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
B = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}

Is A a subset of B? Yes, A is a subset of B. (It's not a proper subset of B, since A is B, but a subset can include the entire set.)
Is B a subset of A? Again, yes. So A = B, and B = A.

Let's try this again:

A = {1, 2, 3}
B = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}

Is A a subset of B? Yes, because A is {1, 2, 3}, and B is {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}.
Is B a subset of A? No, because B contains elements that are not in A -- namely, 4 and 5. So A is not equal to B, and B is not equal to A.

This isn't really a proof of the statement "sets A and B are equal to each other if A is a subset of B and B is a subset of A", but it does demonstrate how the statement works.
This is also useful in proving that 2 wrongs do indeed make a right.

Locked

Return to “General AMV”