UserFriendly Strip Comments


	The Daily Static UF Archives Register UF Membership Ad Free Site Postcards Community Geekfinder UFie Gear Advertise on UF Forum Rules & FAQ Username Password Create a New Account

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index

UF Philosophy Corner - Ontology	by MatthewDBA	2008-09-15 07:31:56
In 2D, 3D, 4D, or more-D?	by bitflipper	2008-09-15 13:27:57
I'm assuming that we're constrained to	by MatthewDBA	2008-09-15 13:36:00
"Reach" the inside? Not really, not in 3D	by bitflipper	2008-09-15 13:55:24
One can define the brick's interior in several different ways, but every attempt to access the interior in 3D will only result in a transformation of the brick's surface; points that were previously on the brick's interior become available on the brick's exterior, to the limit of the brick's composition (in other words, there comes a point where slicing the remains of the brick involves separating molecules from each other or atoms from molecules such that what one is left with exhibits fundamentally different material properties than the original brick had). Three dimensions are not sufficient for allowing access to interior points without first encountering exterior points.
[ Reply ]
I'm not worried about access	by MatthewDBA	2008-09-15 13:56:53
Definition is pretty simple	by bitflipper	2008-09-15 14:14:51

[Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)