Talk:817: Mutual - Revision history

172.68.186.64: Add comment

2018-07-29T18:49:36Z

Add comment

Lou Crazy at 15:23, 21 March 2016

2016-03-21T15:23:05Z

108.162.254.40 at 11:32, 27 November 2014

2014-11-27T11:32:48Z

Dgbrt: Some help on layout

2014-01-15T22:27:48Z

Some help on layout

Squirreltape at 19:23, 15 January 2014

2014-01-15T19:23:08Z

Squirreltape at 19:21, 15 January 2014

2014-01-15T19:21:09Z

Quicksilver at 02:39, 18 August 2013

2013-08-18T02:39:11Z

173.72.159.14 at 21:59, 14 June 2013

2013-06-14T21:59:50Z

66.224.70.107: weird how there are no comments on this one

2013-03-21T23:50:43Z

weird how there are no comments on this one

New page

This is the comic strip that caused xkcdexplained.com to exclaim "fuck this I'm done" and discontinue updating the site. It's probably worth mentioning that: A) It's actually Megan and Cueball's thoughts that are thinking of each other; and B) Both of them are in positions that indicate loneliness or distress. Perhaps it is a commentary on the irony of mutually unrequited love. [[Special:Contributions/66.224.70.107|66.224.70.107]] 23:50, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:49, 29 July 2018
Line 12:		Line 12:
	::In the TV series {{w\|The Prisoner}}, those inmates who refused to follow the rules were called "unmutual". Might this be a reference?		::In the TV series {{w\|The Prisoner}}, those inmates who refused to follow the rules were called "unmutual". Might this be a reference?
	::--[[User:Lou Crazy\|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy\|talk]]) 15:23, 21 March 2016 (UTC)		::--[[User:Lou Crazy\|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy\|talk]]) 15:23, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	I'm thinking the title text may refer to Einstein's one quote: "If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed."--[[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.64\|172.68.186.64]] 18:49, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:23, 21 March 2016
Line 9:		Line 9:
	:Title text is more likely a reference to [[wikipedia:Anthropic_principle\|Anthropic_principle]]		:Title text is more likely a reference to [[wikipedia:Anthropic_principle\|Anthropic_principle]]
	[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.40\|108.162.254.40]] 11:32, 27 November 2014 (UTC)		[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.40\|108.162.254.40]] 11:32, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	::In the TV series {{w\|The Prisoner}}, those inmates who refused to follow the rules were called "unmutual". Might this be a reference?
		+	::--[[User:Lou Crazy\|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy\|talk]]) 15:23, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:32, 27 November 2014
Line 6:		Line 6:

	::Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds on our asses an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)		::Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds on our asses an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Title text is more likely a reference to [[wikipedia:Anthropic_principle\|Anthropic_principle]]
		+	[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.40\|108.162.254.40]] 11:32, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:27, 15 January 2014
Line 5:		Line 5:
	: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)		: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

−	Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds on our asses an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)	+	::Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds on our asses an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 15 January 2014
Line 5:		Line 5:
	: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)		: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

−	Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds "on our asses" an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)	+	Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds on our asses an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:21, 15 January 2014
Line 4:		Line 4:

	: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)		: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	Thanks Quicksilver for the reply... accurate and succint, bravo. Of course, they've gone many-worlds "on our asses" an infinite number of times already... [[User:Squirreltape\|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape\|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:39, 18 August 2013
Line 2:		Line 2:

	As an afterthought, if the universe needs to be observed in order to exist, who will observe it? Some super-universal entity?		As an afterthought, if the universe needs to be observed in order to exist, who will observe it? Some super-universal entity?
		+
		+	: By your logic, yes. Unfortunately, your logic does not fully grasp the backend of quantum mechanics. No one's does. Feynman's didn't. Mine doesn't. And therefore, the measurement paradox (i.e. the philosophical interpretation of quantum mechanics) will remain up in the air until someone can frame it for our classically raised and trained minds. Or maybe they'll just go many-worlds on our asses? --[[User:Quicksilver\|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver\|talk]]) 02:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:59, 14 June 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	This is the comic strip that caused xkcdexplained.com to exclaim "fuck this I'm done" and discontinue updating the site. It's probably worth mentioning that: A) It's actually Megan and Cueball's thoughts that are thinking of each other; and B) Both of them are in positions that indicate loneliness or distress. Perhaps it is a commentary on the irony of mutually unrequited love. [[Special:Contributions/66.224.70.107\|66.224.70.107]] 23:50, 21 March 2013 (UTC)		This is the comic strip that caused xkcdexplained.com to exclaim "fuck this I'm done" and discontinue updating the site. It's probably worth mentioning that: A) It's actually Megan and Cueball's thoughts that are thinking of each other; and B) Both of them are in positions that indicate loneliness or distress. Perhaps it is a commentary on the irony of mutually unrequited love. [[Special:Contributions/66.224.70.107\|66.224.70.107]] 23:50, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	As an afterthought, if the universe needs to be observed in order to exist, who will observe it? Some super-universal entity?