[Unofficial] Weird 3x3 PLL skip

[Lord Voldemort]

I'll freely admit I have no idea what it is, call me stupid, hypocritical, whatever.
I'm sure quite a few other people here do know what it is, so your typing won't go to waste. And now, your 2LOLL algs please.

 

[imaghost]

I'm not going to attempt a character analysis of you imaghost, but I have a good picture in my head.

Please stop insulting people. You might think you aren't but going around telling everybody that through your own logic you have proven General Relativity wrong is rather insulting to the people that actually understand things like general relativity, unlike you.

You are just wrong about the PLL skip likelihood. 2 'opportunities' (or, one more opportunity than full OLL) to skip PLL does not mean you are more likely to skip PLL. Just because you flip 2 coins in a row doesn't mean that you are more likely to get heads than if you just flipped one.

Actually you are wrong. What if I flipped 3? How about a billion? You get a higher chance of getting one heads flipping more coins than just flipping one. I have not insulted one person. I do understand General Relativity, and I have proven it wrong by logic, but I am of course not right. I can not back it up by math. Which is why I didn't want to tell anyone how. Which is the same reason as why I haven't. I completely understand General Relativity. I looked at the opposite, and found out how to prove that right. I always look at different possibilities. I never said General Relativity was wrong. I just said I could logically prove it wrong. Not all things mathematically are right either. Helicopters and bumblebees can not physically fly, yet they do. You can easily look at it and LOGICALLY see how they do.

I'll freely admit I have no idea what it is, call me stupid, hypocritical, whatever.
I'm sure quite a few other people here do know what it is, so your typing won't go to waste. And now, your 2LOLL algs please.

I don't want people to know, because I know it is wrong either way. It takes a full understanding of what General Relativity is to understand how I could prove it wrong. But logic isn't always right either. That is why I support General Relativity, and don't want people to see that I am wrong, and why I even brought it up. I think logically, and that is all.

As for OLL algorithms, I don't know what 2LOLL is, or most other things like it. I use 4-10 on cubewhiz.com and on number 7 and 8, I sometimes hold the cube backwards and perform the algorithm. I know a couple more OLLs, like the 2 Ts, but who cares.

 

[Ethan Rosen]

You're an idiot. If you flip a billion coins you have a higher chance of getting one heads then if you just flipped one. If you flip a billion coins though, your chance of getting a heads on the 37th coin is the same as if you flipped 37 coins. If you do the same OLL twice, only one of those times will result in the end of OLL. The chances of getting an OLL skip on that one are the same as if you did it 100000000000 times and had to stop on the last one.

 

[ender9994]

I'm not going to attempt a character analysis of you imaghost, but I have a good picture in my head.

Please stop insulting people. You might think you aren't but going around telling everybody that through your own logic you have proven General Relativity wrong is rather insulting to the people that actually understand things like general relativity, unlike you.

You are just wrong about the PLL skip likelihood. 2 'opportunities' (or, one more opportunity than full OLL) to skip PLL does not mean you are more likely to skip PLL. Just because you flip 2 coins in a row doesn't mean that you are more likely to get heads than if you just flipped one.

Actually you are wrong. What if I flipped 3? How about a billion? You get a higher chance of getting one heads flipping more coins than just flipping one. I have not insulted one person. I do understand General Relativity, and I have proven it wrong by logic, but I am of course not right. I can not back it up by math. Which is why I didn't want to tell anyone how. Which is the same reason as why I haven't. I completely understand General Relativity. I looked at the opposite, and found out how to prove that right. I always look at different possibilities. I never said General Relativity was wrong. I just said I could logically prove it wrong. Not all things mathematically are right either. Helicopters and bumblebees can not physically fly, yet they do. You can easily look at it and LOGICALLY see how they do.

Huh???????? Helicopters are built to be allowed to fly by basing the designs on physics...And as for bumblebees, thats a myth that 10 year olds still believe in

 

[imaghost]

You're an idiot. If you flip a billion coins you have a higher chance of getting one heads then if you just flipped one. If you flip a billion coins though, your chance of getting a heads on the 37th coin is the same as if you flipped 37 coins. If you do the same OLL twice, only one of those times will result in the end of OLL. The chances of getting an OLL skip on that one are the same as if you did it 100000000000 times and had to stop on the last one.

Ok whatever you say. I will completely change my way of thinking just because of some person on the internet called me stupid. You are wrong. If I did one OLL, then there is a low chance of getting PLL skip. If I did a billion, I am pretty sure you will get at least one.

 

[Lord Voldemort]

Any sources that say that helicopters can't fly?
If physics says that they can't fly, I don't see why it's taught at schools if there's such an obvious example that it doesn't work.

 

[AvGalen]

If you are flipping a billion coins and only get 1 heads I will give you a billion dollar

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumblebee#Bumblebee_myths

Please, stop with all this bad statistics and other nonsense

 

[Escher]

Actually you are wrong. What if I flipped 3? How about a billion? You get a higher chance of getting one heads flipping more coins than just flipping one. I have not insulted one person. I do understand General Relativity, and I have proven it wrong by logic, but I am of course not right. I can not back it up by math. Which is why I didn't want to tell anyone how. Which is the same reason as why I haven't. I completely understand General Relativity. I looked at the opposite, and found out how to prove that right. I always look at different possibilities. I never said General Relativity was wrong. I just said I could logically prove it wrong. Not all things mathematically are right either. Helicopters and bumblebees can not physically fly, yet they do. You can easily look at it and LOGICALLY see how they do.

You still don't get it do you?

You can flip as many coins as you like, you still won't increase your chances of flipping heads. It is always going to be 1/2. That's the nature of the beast.

Mathematics is not some kind of 'idea-proving magic' that is separate from logic. I don't know how to get it across to you.

I was going to write more, but in fact, I can't be bothered. I would rather let you wallow in your own ego. I hope that when you grow up, you'll remember this and be embarrassed. Because I am for you.


EDIT:

I don't want people to know, because I know it is wrong either way. It takes a full understanding of what General Relativity is to understand how I could prove it wrong. But logic isn't always right either. That is why I support General Relativity, and don't want people to see that I am wrong, and why I even brought it up. I think logically, and that is all.

LOL.

 

[Ethan Rosen]

You're an idiot. If you flip a billion coins you have a higher chance of getting one heads then if you just flipped one. If you flip a billion coins though, your chance of getting a heads on the 37th coin is the same as if you flipped 37 coins. If you do the same OLL twice, only one of those times will result in the end of OLL. The chances of getting an OLL skip on that one are the same as if you did it 100000000000 times and had to stop on the last one.

Ok whatever you say. I will completely change my way of thinking just because of some person on the internet called me stupid. You are wrong. If I did one OLL, then there is a low chance of getting PLL skip. If I did a billion, I am pretty sure you will get at least one.

I'm wondering if you're trolling, because nobody can possibly be this stupid.

If you do the really beginners OLL then that has you doing sune at most 7 times iirc. Your chances of having every piece permuted at one point during these seven OLLs is much higher than if you just did sune once. That said though, your chances of having a solved PLL at the end of the LAST sune (meaning all pieces oriented) is still 1/72.

 

[imaghost]

You're an idiot. If you flip a billion coins you have a higher chance of getting one heads then if you just flipped one. If you flip a billion coins though, your chance of getting a heads on the 37th coin is the same as if you flipped 37 coins. If you do the same OLL twice, only one of those times will result in the end of OLL. The chances of getting an OLL skip on that one are the same as if you did it 100000000000 times and had to stop on the last one.

Ok whatever you say. I will completely change my way of thinking just because of some person on the internet called me stupid. You are wrong. If I did one OLL, then there is a low chance of getting PLL skip. If I did a billion, I am pretty sure you will get at least one.

I'm wondering if you're trolling, because nobody can possibly be this stupid.

If you do the really beginners OLL then that has you doing sune at most 7 times iirc. Your chances of having every piece permuted at one point during these seven OLLs is much higher than if you just did sune once. That said though, your chances of having a solved PLL at the end of the LAST sune (meaning all pieces oriented) is still 1/72.

ok so now I am the dumbest person in the world. Again, statistics are statistics. They can be completely wrong. If I flip 4 coins, according to statistics, I will have 2 heads, 2 tails. Not always the case. You can have all 4 the same. I don't always have one out of 72. I get more, almost always. I don't count, but I do know that I have them more often than that. Calling me stupid makes you the one trolling.

Actually you are wrong. What if I flipped 3? How about a billion? You get a higher chance of getting one heads flipping more coins than just flipping one. I have not insulted one person. I do understand General Relativity, and I have proven it wrong by logic, but I am of course not right. I can not back it up by math. Which is why I didn't want to tell anyone how. Which is the same reason as why I haven't. I completely understand General Relativity. I looked at the opposite, and found out how to prove that right. I always look at different possibilities. I never said General Relativity was wrong. I just said I could logically prove it wrong. Not all things mathematically are right either. Helicopters and bumblebees can not physically fly, yet they do. You can easily look at it and LOGICALLY see how they do.

You still don't get it do you?

You can flip as many coins as you like, you still won't increase your chances of flipping heads. It is always going to be 1/2. That's the nature of the beast.

Mathematics is not some kind of 'idea-proving magic' that is separate from logic. I don't know how to get it across to you.

I was going to write more, but in fact, I can't be bothered. I would rather let you wallow in your own ego. I hope that when you grow up, you'll remember this and be embarrassed. Because I am for you.

Oh I get it completely. Again, If I flip a billion coins, according to this statistics, I will always have 500 million heads, 500 million tails. I bet you a billion dollars, that if you did this, that will not happen.

 

[Dene]

imaghost: You are an idiot.
I am a philosophy major, I know ALL ABOUT LOGIC. I also know that logic can be used to prove almost anything, and there is ALWAYS A FLAW IN THE REASONING if it is inconsistent with mathematics and physical laws. Logic can only be used for metaphysics, and you are not in that realm. I suggest you stop thinking that you are logically doing anything. The only thing you are doing is failing miserably. You obviously have no concept of what logic is or how to use it.

 

[Escher]

Oh I get it completely.

No you don't.

You clearly don't understand what I'm trying to get at. You clearly don't understand probability, and you clearly don't understand any cube theory whatsoever.

Go away, do some reading, search around the forums, think about things, solve some cubes, learn what each of your 2 look OLL algorithms does to the cube, then read some more, then take some lessons in probability. Then talk to your mathematics teacher.

Just please stop thinking that you're a 'genius in logic' when you are surrounded by some of the most intelligent people I've ever come into contact with. Just admit that you are wrong. Admit that you don't actually understand General Relativity, nor that you actually understand logic, nor that you can disprove using logic that general relativity is wrong.

You don't seem to actually understand what the word 'proof' entails.

I'm ignoring this thread from now on, you get me way too worked up.

 

[imaghost]

imaghost: You are an idiot.
I am a philosophy major, I know ALL ABOUT LOGIC. I also know that logic can be used to prove almost anything, and there is ALWAYS A FLAW IN THE REASONING if it is inconsistent with mathematics and physical laws. Logic can only be used for metaphysics, and you are not in that realm. I suggest you stop thinking that you are logically doing anything. The only thing you are doing is failing miserably. You obviously have no concept of what logic is or how to use it.

I know exactly what I am talking about. Which is why I never tell anyone, because people like you want to insult me about it. I already know I am wrong. Logically I am right, mathematically I am wrong. You proved my point. "ALWAYS A FLAW IN THE REASONING if it is inconsistent with mathematics and physical laws" It is inconsistent, and is wrong. Notice how I haven't told anyone how General Relativity is wrong with the logic I used. Because I know that mathematically it is right. I am not an idiot. I do know what logic is. That is how I go in detail of everything I do. You are the idiot calling me stupid and how I fail when you proved my point.

Oh I get it completely.

No you don't.

You clearly don't understand what I'm trying to get at. You clearly don't understand probability, and you clearly don't understand any cube theory whatsoever.

Go away, do some reading, search around the forums, think about things, solve some cubes, learn what each of your 2 look OLL algorithms does to the cube, then read some more, then take some lessons in probability. Then talk to your mathematics teacher.

Just please stop thinking that you're a 'genius in logic' when you are surrounded by some of the most intelligent people I've ever come into contact with. Just admit that you are wrong. Admit that you don't actually understand General Relativity, nor that you actually understand logic, nor that you can disprove using logic that general relativity is wrong.

You don't seem to actually understand what the word 'proof' entails.

I'm ignoring this thread from now on, you get me way too worked up.

Wow. Just wow. You are stupid. You don't even know anything I have said. I know General Relativity. That is why I can think logically about it. No I don't completely understand cube theory, which is why the first question, that started all of this, was asked. I did not disprove General Relativity is wrong by using logic. Nobody fully understands General Relativity. I know I am not a genius in logic, neither are you. And, neither is anybody here. You too, proved me right, that I was wrong. I already knew that, I still know that. I never told you how I disproved General Relativity, because it is wrong, and I know that. BUT, It makes sense.

 

[Dene]

If you have proven it wrong with logic, then write out formally here all the steps in your reasoning, and with a clear conclusion that logically follows from the premisses please. I bet you can't do it.

 

[imaghost]

If you have proven it wrong with logic, then write out formally here all the steps in your reasoning, and with a clear conclusion that logically follows from the premisses please. I bet you can't do it.

Why? It is wrong. It takes a very good understanding of what it is, and probably some pictures that prove General Relativity is right. It also takes prior knowledge of other forms of physics, like electrical. Electricity is what I compared it to. I won't say it, I know it is wrong. It can probably be easily proven wrong. I know that.

 

[veazer]

Logic, defined by dictionary.reference.com

1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.
3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.
5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.



Synonyms:
4. sense, cogency.


Just figured it might help to get everyone here on the same page.

 

[Escher]

I did not disprove General Relativity is wrong by using logic.

Yet earlier in the thread...

Using logic, I have proved General Relativity wrong.

 

[imaghost]

I did not disprove General Relativity is wrong by using logic.

Yet earlier in the thread...

Using logic, I have proved General Relativity wrong.

think about what you said. You basically said I proved it right using logic. Disproving something is wrong, means proving something right.

 

[Escher]

I did not disprove General Relativity is wrong by using logic.

Yet earlier in the thread...

Using logic, I have proved General Relativity wrong.

think about what you said. You basically said I proved it right using logic. Disproving something is wrong, means proving something right.

Um Um Um

Imaghost says:

I have disproved X using logic

Imaghost later says:

I did not disprove X using logic.

Could you point out exactly what I've done wrong?

 

[imaghost]

I did not disprove General Relativity is wrong by using logic.

Yet earlier in the thread...

Using logic, I have proved General Relativity wrong.

think about what you said. You basically said I proved it right using logic. Disproving something is wrong, means proving something right.

Um Um Um

Imaghost says:

I have disproved X using logic

Imaghost later says:

I did not disprove X using logic.

Could you point out exactly what I've done wrong?

"I did not disprove General Relativity is wrong by using logic."
I disproved General Relativity is right by using logic.
I proved General Relativity is wrong by using logic.