Okay, I've been getting some flak about Theorem 1.0, so I'm here to clarify a few things that I guess I thought were just 'given'.
If a bug does not eat a smaller bug, it doesn't count as a bug. It's just an insect. 'Bug' is a subset of insects. Well, maybe it wasn't before, but it is now. They were just redundant words before today. So another example:
You have 5 ants and 1 large bug in a jar. If the large bug doesn't have a jones for eating smaller bugs, it's just an insect, and you're doing it wrong. Otherwise, the sum of the bugs is 1.
You see, you can't just take someone's carefully calculated theorems and just insert whatever crap you have lying around into it. Like, I wouldn't take the second law of thermodynamics and just replace the word 'heat' with 'barnacles'. It doesn't work if you just crap it up like that. This is why I can't have nice scientific awards.
Also, while it might work if you have small bugs in a jar and then put in a lizard, that is a gross extrapolation of the theorem. You can't just make things up. These theorems undergo rigorous scientific testing, and the scientific method. That might make a good Theorem 1.1, but I'm not just going to jump out there and claim things that haven't been proven.
No comments:
Post a Comment