On Jun 28, 12:15 am, m II wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you
please but do save the zeros for those that need them.

an a-null-ment is in order.

mike

On Jun 28, 12:15 am, m II wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you
please but do save the zeros for those that need them.

an a-null-ment is in order.

mike

.. . . ? . . .

m II hath wroth:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you
please but do save the zeros for those that need them.

an a-null-ment is in order.
mike

Divorcing oneself from reality is probably easier and cheaper than
getting the church involved in an annulment.

The problem here is that most people don't understand the difference
between a zero and a null. Zeros are easy as they are place holders
for orders of magnitude increases in quantities. Nulls are what's
left when we run out of zeros. Think of nulls as place holders for
the missing zeros.

The uncontrolled substitution of nulls for missing zeros has the
potential for destroying civilization as we know it. For example, a
check written for a million dollars would normally be inscribed:
$1,000,000.00
When all the zero have been consumed and replaced by nulls, it would
look like this:
$1, , .
which leaves much to the imagination. Perhaps we should add zeros to
the endangered "specie" list?

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
m II hath wroth:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you
please but do save the zeros for those that need them.

an a-null-ment is in order.
mike

Divorcing oneself from reality is probably easier and cheaper than
getting the church involved in an annulment.

The problem here is that most people don't understand the difference
between a zero and a null. Zeros are easy as they are place holders
for orders of magnitude increases in quantities. Nulls are what's
left when we run out of zeros. Think of nulls as place holders for
the missing zeros.

The uncontrolled substitution of nulls for missing zeros has the
potential for destroying civilization as we know it. For example, a
check written for a million dollars would normally be inscribed:
$1,000,000.00
When all the zero have been consumed and replaced by nulls, it would
look like this:
$1, , .
which leaves much to the imagination. Perhaps we should add zeros to
the endangered "specie" list?

Doesn't the space collapse so that we end up with $1...?

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:09:37 GMT, Larry Finger
wrote:

Doesn't the space collapse so that we end up with $1...?

Space does not collapse except in the vicinity of a black hole. Space
also tends to collapse during department reorganizations, where
there's never enough space left.

There's also the problem of accounting for the missing nulls. Where
did they go and what was the exchange rate?

Such things are fairly important. For example, did you ever notice
that Roman Numerals do not have a zero or a null? There was a half
hearted attempt at inventing zero or null (nulla), but fortunately
that failed for many centuries. Rome survived much decadence and some
really weird Emperors without much difficulty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals
However, no sooner than the Romans adopted the bad habits of their
conquered neighbors, which included zero and null, did their
civilzation falter and eventually die. At the least, this should be
an obvious clue that messing with zero and null should not be taken
lightly.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

"Radium" wrote in message
oups.com...

snip


No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the
jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am
really interested in this.



Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced
newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the
output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on
it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think
"rotating vector."

No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red
zone.

On Jun 28, 3:52 am, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:
"Radium" wrote in message

oups.com...

snip



No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the
jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am
really interested in this.

Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced
newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the
output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on
it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think
"rotating vector."

No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red
zone.

Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red
zone.
Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity.

On Jun 28, 9:55 am, Martin wrote:
On Jun 28, 3:52 am, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:





"Radium" wrote in message

roups.com...

snip

No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the
jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am
really interested in this.

Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced
newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the
output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on
it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think
"rotating vector."

No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red
zone.

Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red
zone.
Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.. . . ? . . .

"Martin" wrote in message
oups.com...

snip


Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red
zone.
Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity.

Big laugh -- TKS

On Jul 2, 9:37 pm, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:
"Martin" wrote in message

oups.com...

snip

Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red
zone.
Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity.

Big laugh -- TKS

troll alert, Troll Alert. TROLL ALERT !
http://www.lostinspacerobot.com/
Danger Will Robinson ! - Troll Alert . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danger%2C_Will_Robinson