*************************************** From: Amal Dorai So most of you thought that BU chicks were hot... Obviously most of you haven't been to George Washington. Unbelievable. Plus, these girls are a LOT smarter/cooler than those vacuous BU girls. nuff said Amal *************************************** From: Lauren McCann In defense of my best friend, not all BU girls are vacuous. Lauren *************************************** From: Katie Fillion >Unbelievable. Plus, these girls are a LOT smarter/cooler than those vacuous >BU girls. > all that means is you have less of a chance of gettin some... *************************************** From: Amal Dorai No Katie, It does not lower my chances of getting laid at all. Probabilities cannot be negative, therefore a probability of 0 cannot drop any lower. That's what you get for being Course 7. -Amal *************************************** From: "Ryan D. Williams" Look here, you. One of the principal axioms of probability states that within a sample space, no outcome may have a probability of 0.Our current experiment (Whether or not Amal will get laid) has a sample space consisting of two elements: {Amal gets laid; Amal doesn't get laid}.The probability of the first outcome {Amal gets laid}, no matter how vanishingly small, must have some tiny positive value (to account for random things like women exhibiting a quantum tunneling effect that places them right onto Amal's cock).Therefore Katie is perfectly correct in her statement (for example, smarter women would give Amal a wider berth, thereby decreasing the likelihood of quantum-tunneling onto his cock). That's what you get for being all over the place. -RYaN *************************************** From: Qin Well done on the probability axiom!!! :-) I am, however, unfamiliar with the "quantum-tunneling effect". I was wondering, if you could explain how smarter women might escape the effect. Q. *************************************** From: "Roger Yeh" dear members and friends of putz, it is with great honor that i address such a prestigious group of individuals regarding the following: i was just thinking, the probability of amal getting laid is the probability of women exhibiting a quantum tunneling effect that places them right onto Amal's cock PLUS the much higher probability of men wanting a piece of that adoraing (meant to be a pun) ass.don't overlook that. and for those of you who've been lucky enough to hear the beautiful music coming from wood 213 at three in the morning: die motherfucker die motherfucker die peace and love, roger. *************************************** From: "Ryan D. Williams" Q asks: >I am, however, unfamiliar with the "quantum-tunneling effect". I was >wondering, if you could explain how smarter women might escape the effect. This all has to do with the uncertainty inherent in quantum systems. Since you can never know precisely where a particle is (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle), physicists sometimes represent particles as normal distributions throughout space. The thickness of the normal at any point indicates the probability that the particle of interest (let's call it an electron) is at that specific point. This way, you can say that the electron has a 90% chance of being within a certain region of space, and compute all sorts of other exciting stuff I'm sure Teresa, Erin, Jeff, and Kendall can tell you all about. The normal distribution, as you may recall, is sort of humped in the middle, and spreads outward and down towards zero. But it never quite reaches zero. So there's always some small probability that the electron is way the hell away from your center hump. Of course, it's much more likely that it's somewhere within the hump, but there's always those very small chances that can make the electron appear tens of feet distant from where you thought it was. The distribution is not affected by the presence of matter (as far as I know), and therefore the electron will very occasionally find itself on the other side of a barrier of some sort. This is quantum tunneling. They use this effect in scanning tunneling electron microscopes. They basically have this electron gun that shoots whacking great quantities of electrons at whatever you're looking at (actually, I believe they shoot the electrons across the surface of the target specimen, but that's irrelevant). Some of these electrons will inevitably tunnel themselves to the other side of your target, and there they hit a receptor, which counts them up. Since it's more probable that an electron will tunnel a very small distance than a large one, you get more electrons where the material is thinnest, and few in the thicker areas. Kind of like looking through a semi-opaque material, where the darker areas mean that the material is thicker. If it's improbable that an electron should tunnel through the air a number of feet, it's that much more improbable that two electrons should tunnel in precisely the same direction and for the same distance. You can represent this by describing as a normal distribution the probability of the two particles tunneling together to the same point in space relative to their original positions. So now you've got another normal distribution, albeit much lower throughout and with a sharper peak in the middle. This represents sort of the probability of a linked tunneling effect. Extend this concept to accommodate more and more particles, some of which aren't electrons, and you can see the probability distribution for a linked tunneling of all the particles in a particular object. You can easily see that the probability of the several quadrillions of atoms' worth of subatomic particles that make up a woman (even a small one like Laura) tunneling a precise distance (of an arbitrary length, maybe even miles!) in such a way that they all end up assembled on Amal's cock is vanishingly small. But the probability does exist. It's a trivial exercise to see that, due to the shape of the normal distribution, the farther this woman is from Amal, the smaller the chance that she spontaneously tunnels into position onto his cock. Smart women think of these things, you know. I'm not going to talk about the probability of guys wanting to get with Amal, since it isn't easily modeled by a probabilistic system. Anyway, I guess I just proved to you guys with the length of this treatise how pleasantly unfettered my time is these days. :-) -RYaN (P.S.: If any of the above-mentioned physics majors would like to correct my explanation, please do so.I'm pretty sure the idea is correct, but I may have lost some in the transation from Stephen Hawking.) *************************************** To:putz@mit.edu Subject: Quantum Physics Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:05:03 -0500 From: Amal Dorai So first both our pants would have to quantum tunnel off, right? Breath's major error: Having a woman quantum tunnel onto your cock does NOT constitute having sex with her. So I showed the entire thread a number of the girls at GWU who triggered the first email and they thought it was really funny. In my friend Kate's words: "Give enough nerds enough time and any conversation will end up being about quantum physics."