Who will Win

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#4,101
Jul 31, 2013
37,957
13,615
113
#4,101
posthuman said:
you didn't even read the page you linked, eh?

it contains no proof, nor even a definition of 'most irrational'

what it states about convergent subseries is true for any integer multiple of phi -- therefore ((as previously intimated)) there are infinitely many irrational numbers with equally poor convergent approximations.

you don't know what you're talking about, and to people who do, you look dumber every time you bring it up.
Click to expand...
let me dumb it down for you @cv5

φ is irrational
2φ is irrational
3φ is irrational
4φ is irrational
.
.
.
nφ is irrational for any integer n



one of φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates φ
one of 2φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 2φ
one of 3φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 3φ
one of 4φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 4φ
.
.
.
one of nφ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates nφ, for any integer n


which member of this infinite set each with equally poor truncated infinite series representation approximations is "most irrational" ??
define 'most irrational' please.
 
S

SophieT

Guest
#4,102
#4,102
Johnjo said:
So who’s gonna be president after the SCOTUS has based on what you just presented here?
Click to expand...
That's a quote from the Supreme Court of the United States website

Over your head I guess
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#4,103
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
#4,103
Roughsoul1991 said:
It is truly amazing how fast despite the evidence. Things are going to get interesting.
Click to expand...
It appears the court is looking for a case withing the States Jurisdiction, Voting Resident, Business,Etc

Texas has no interest in another States election process?

There are many cases pending, we will see how things go, this was a big shock.

Will the US Supreme Court deny future cases pending, such as LinWood's on the docket to be heard?

Will the Republican controlled Legislature's in these States, allow the fraudulent electors to move forward?

Will the US Senate and House have at least one objection to the electors to start debate?

Will The Senate Approve The Electors After Debate?

Texas Tribune:
Quote Article: In a few brief sentences, the high court said it would not consider the case for procedural reasons, because Texas lacked standing to bring it.
"Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," the court wrote in an unsigned ruling Friday evening.
 
J

Johnjo

Guest
#4,104
#4,104
SophieT said:
Ignorance is going to destroy more things that most people will give it credit for. But then, isn't that what ignorance is about and why it is dangerous?

The constitution was thrown out the window by the states named in the case brought by Texas

Half the Supremes have ignored the constitution for years anyway
Click to expand...
That’s not the case as of today based on a conservative body count of the members of the SCOTUS. Thing is that the SCOTUS has no soft spot for conspiracy theories.
 
S

SophieT

Guest
#4,106
#4,106
Johnjo said:
The term “objective” left this country a long time ago. We have resorted to being a nation of natural born polarized people out of touch with reality.
Click to expand...
Just woke up from a 4 year nap did you?
 
S

SophieT

Guest
#4,107
#4,107
Johnjo said:
That’s not the case as of today based on a conservative body count of the members of the SCOTUS. Thing is that the SCOTUS has no soft spot for conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...
Well they are running with one now. Watch and learn.
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#4,109
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
#4,109
Johnjo said:
That’s not the case as of today based on a conservative body count of the members of the SCOTUS. Thing is that the SCOTUS has no soft spot for conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...
The ruling had nothing to do with conspiracy, it was ruled that Texas had no jurisdiction in another States election process, State Vs State
 
J

Johnjo

Guest
#4,112
#4,112
Truth7t7 said:
The ruling had nothing to do with conspiracy, it was ruled that Texas had no jurisdiction in another States election process, State Vs State
Click to expand...
And just how will the state of Texas proceed from that?
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
#4,113
#4,113
posthuman said:
let me dumb it down for you @cv5

φ is irrational
2φ is irrational
3φ is irrational
4φ is irrational
.
.
.
nφ is irrational for any integer n



one of φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates φ
one of 2φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 2φ
one of 3φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 3φ
one of 4φ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates 4φ
.
.
.
one of nφ's infinite series representations when truncated poorly approximates nφ, for any integer n


which member of this infinite set each with equally poor truncated infinite series representation approximations is "most irrational" ??
define 'most irrational' please.
Click to expand...
I so get this ... (y)
 
S

SophieT

Guest
#4,114
#4,114
Truth7t7 said:
The ruling had nothing to do with conspiracy, it was ruled that Texas had no jurisdiction in another States election process, State Vs State
Click to expand...
Right. and yet we have one of the major disseminators of misinformation saying they said the case had no merit
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#4,115
Jul 31, 2013
37,957
13,615
113
#4,115
Johnjo said:
You saying he’s the @realDonadTrump?😁
Click to expand...
only a disciple of him, i'm afraid. real Don is too busy with important government matters to be tweeting nonsense, KGB propaganda & disinformation in the middle of the night or spending half his days out golfing, and he gets his information from better sources than conspiracy theorists & hack news outlets..

.. wait ..
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#4,116
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
#4,116
EleventhHour said:
Perhaps more like ... "lack of evidence."

However, this was more about federal undermining the states, something a conservative should not favor actually, and really that was not going to happen.
Click to expand...
Wrong, the ruling was State Vs State not Federal, as seen below in bold red.

Texas Tribune:
Quote Article: In a few brief sentences, the high court said it would not consider the case for procedural reasons, because Texas lacked standing to bring it.
"Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," the court wrote in an unsigned ruling Friday evening.
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#4,118
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
#4,118
Johnjo said:
And just how will the state of Texas proceed from that?
Click to expand...
The Texas suit is done, no further recourse

There are several other cases heading to the Supreme Court,one is on the docket LinWood has a case, Sydney Powell Has Cases, many others not named have cases
 
J

Johnjo

Guest
#4,119
#4,119
Truth7t7 said:
Wrong, the ruling was State Vs State not Federal

Texas was deemed
Click to expand...
Wait, wait, wait...the great state of Texas is deliberately, or in fact
premeditated, filling a lawsuit to undermine the constitutional rights of another American state? What happened to states rights, don’t thread on me and don’t mess with Texas?
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#4,120
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
#4,120
Johnjo said:
Wait, wait, wait...the great state of Texas is deliberately, or in fact
premeditated, filling a lawsuit to undermine the constitutional rights of another American state? What happened to states rights, don’t thread on me and don’t mess with Texas?
Click to expand...
The Texas suit is done, no further recourse

There are several other cases heading to the Supreme Court,one is on the docket LinWood has a case, Sydney Powell Has Cases, many others not named have cases
 
Status
Not open for further replies.