The Wonderland Board

Schrodinger's monitor: is both punched and not punched at the same time until moment X when its fate is finally decided.

... I can have some fun with this.

This whole word-cruft-define-stuff-etc reminds me of the "What is the opposite of lightness?" disaster that I once posted in "Tricky Puzzles". Great puzzle, great idea... but a total disaster, because my original solution was wrong! Marinus then got it right and proved his as the ONLY solution which actually worked in my own line of thinking... was a bit of a shame for me, but an interesting experience nonetheless.

Plus, with such "opposite" puzzles you can just say the right answer and troll the heck out of people by watching them trying to understand why THAT is correct and the obvious one isn't! If you're in an evil mood, it's terrific fun.

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

MyNameIsKooky wrote:I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

OK, I'll try to let you laugh.

If the oldest quotationmark, or the highest / lowest level (not sure what's high and what's low) will dissappear, then "all reality would be a contradiction." Because the oldest quote is the origin / beginning of the whole story, and if there's no beginning, there will be no end. Or, with other words, there's no reality.

Marinus wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

OK, I'll try to let you laugh.

If the oldest quotationmark, or the highest / lowest level (not sure what's high and what's low) will dissappear, then "all reality would be a contradiction." Because the oldest quote is the origin / beginning of the whole story, and if there's no beginning, there will be no end. Or, with other words, there's no reality.

Must continue. If someone grabs your fist and makes it punch the screen, you are punching it because you're doing that motion but you aren't because you aren't doing it yourself.

I like how the bold names in the quotes make a staircase. *shot*

I like how it looks like the top of a rectangular box-thing. *shot*

I was wrong, your fist, in fact the very atoms at the end of your fist, are the ones who smashed your computer screen. And "You" means your entire body, not just your brain. So Emerald141 was right when saying:

Emerald141 wrote:Well, your fist is the one colliding with the computer screen, so that's still you doing it.

The way I was thinking about it was that only a brain would be making it happen. But actually there wouldn't be much difference in your brain making your fist punch it than anything else making your fist punch it, so that would then mean that everything would be responsible.

I was hoping you would argue back so we could try and get it even longer. XD

boywhoflies wrote:

Marinus wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

OK, I'll try to let you laugh.

If the oldest quotationmark, or the highest / lowest level (not sure what's high and what's low) will dissappear, then "all reality would be a contradiction." Because the oldest quote is the origin / beginning of the whole story, and if there's no beginning, there will be no end. Or, with other words, there's no reality.

Must continue. If someone grabs your fist and makes it punch the screen, you are punching it because you're doing that motion but you aren't because you aren't doing it yourself.

This is getting fun.

*looks left*

*looks right*

[/quote]

Nobody wrote:[/quote]

NO

Anyways, let's get back to intelligent conversation on the particular topic of being at hand.

[size=0]

Midnight Synergy wrote:[/size]

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Nobody wrote:[/quote]

NO

Anyways, let's get back to intelligent conversation on the particular topic of being at hand.

OK.

Being is a thing to be. If you are being evil, than is evilness a thing to also be, or would not being that spin a peripheral at it's heels? There are many things that being could be, but it simply is instead. Everything we know is not the same as everything. Whether or not flying cars exist depends on your definition of them. If something will exist tomorrow, is it existent or nonexistent? Yeah probably.

MyNameIsKooky wrote:Must we live our lives, which aren't, according to the principles of not, which are not? Then what is it? WHAT? Is it W, which is not, H, which is not, or I, which is not either? Are you there? No. Am I here? No. Well then, WHO IS? We know: YOU, not the U symbolic, but you pronomial. But let's not be absurd. Let's not label our own labels. Otherwise we are making this topic a topic. AND THIS MIGHT NOT BE A TOPIC!!! Why? Because you aren't. So, ah, all who aren't, are, and those who are, are not. But wait, this means that if one, being not one, is not, then they of course must not be, then won't, but were, now aren't, then is, but not ... one. Ah, it is all now apparently obvious, no?

You call that intelligent? If so, translate and tell how that does not contradict what you have been saying. *shot*

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:Must we live our lives, which aren't, according to the principles of not, which are not? Then what is it? WHAT? Is it W, which is not, H, which is not, or I, which is not either? Are you there? No. Am I here? No. Well then, WHO IS? We know: YOU, not the U symbolic, but you pronomial. But let's not be absurd. Let's not label our own labels. Otherwise we are making this topic a topic. AND THIS MIGHT NOT BE A TOPIC!!! Why? Because you aren't. So, ah, all who aren't, are, and those who are, are not. But wait, this means that if one, being not one, is not, then they of course must not be, then won't, but were, now aren't, then is, but not ... one. Ah, it is all now apparently obvious, no?

You call that intelligent? If so, translate and tell how that does not contradict what you have been saying. *shot*

I do not understand what you mean when you say to "translate" it. It's already in English, or are you just too unintelligent to understand? I've also already explained why it doesn't contradict my points.

This thread is perfect for pieces of crazy... to be read whenever you feel bored.

Nobody wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Marinus wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

OK, I'll try to let you laugh.

If the oldest quotationmark, or the highest / lowest level (not sure what's high and what's low) will dissappear, then "all reality would be a contradiction." Because the oldest quote is the origin / beginning of the whole story, and if there's no beginning, there will be no end. Or, with other words, there's no reality.

Must continue. If someone grabs your fist and makes it punch the screen, you are punching it because you're doing that motion but you aren't because you aren't doing it yourself.

This is getting fun.

*looks left*

*looks right*

[/quote]
Why must the [/quote] be in [/quote]?

tyteen4a03 wrote:

Nobody wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Marinus wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence?

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

OK, I'll try to let you laugh.

If the oldest quotationmark, or the highest / lowest level (not sure what's high and what's low) will dissappear, then "all reality would be a contradiction." Because the oldest quote is the origin / beginning of the whole story, and if there's no beginning, there will be no end. Or, with other words, there's no reality.

Must continue. If someone grabs your fist and makes it punch the screen, you are punching it because you're doing that motion but you aren't because you aren't doing it yourself.

This is getting fun.

*looks left*

*looks right*

Why must the [/quote] be in [/quote]?[/quote]
To mess everything up.

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

tyteen4a03 wrote:

Nobody wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Marinus wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:I will laugh so hard if this gets to 10 pages.

Marinus wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

billy bob wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

boywhoflies wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:

MyNameIsKooky wrote:

Master Wonder Mage wrote:If I weren't typing this, but yet I am, all reality would be a contradiction.

So if you didn't make that post, all of reality would contradict itself? Where did you gain such influence? Did you perhaps totally be without the slightest hint of not being in any iota?

No. What I was saying was that if I could be doing something, yet not doing something, then everything could be able to be a contradiction. If one thing has proved something possible, then why couldn't and shouldn't everything be able to do the same thing. In other words, its impossible to be able to do something yet not do it.

Actually, you can. Lets say, you can go punch your monitor but you can avoid doing it.

But I can't go punch my monitor but not go punch my monitor at the same time.

You could punch your monitor with your left hand and not punch it with your right hand. But that's getting a little far.

No, you are still punching your computer screen.

With your left hand. You aren't punching it with your right hand.

Both arms are controlled by your brain. It doesn't matter which arm you controlled to punch it and which arm you didn't, either way, you punched it.

True. The best arguement I can think of is that if someone grabs your fist and makes you do it, you aren't doing it yourself, and that wasn't what we were saying.

How many levels of existence ... I mean: quotationboxes are there actually? When I look at this, it seems I see a very long tunnel, perhaps to an.......


.... other level of existence? 8)

Perhaps. However, if there are too many quotation boxes, the oldest quotation box will disappear. I suppose this proves the theory that there are only so many levels of existence.

OK, I'll try to let you laugh. :lol:

If the oldest quotationmark, or the highest / lowest level (not sure what's high and what's low) will dissappear, then "all reality would be a contradiction." Because the oldest quote is the origin / beginning of the whole story, and if there's no beginning, there will be no end. Or, with other words, there's no reality.:wink:

Must continue. If someone grabs your fist and makes it punch the screen, you are punching it because you're doing that motion but you aren't because you aren't doing it yourself.

This is getting fun.

*looks left*

*looks right*

Why must the

be in [/quote]?[/quote]
To mess everything up.[/quote]

...

Now, let's halt the unintelligent quote pyramid and awful jokes and get back to something more... productive. You don't want me to become an angry misanthrope now, do you? I will be very upset. Seriously.

Let's talk about being not. What is not? Just not. Describing not is, in fact, quite difficult. It would be nice if it was difficult in the sense of not, because then, in so called "English terms," as Master Wonder Mage says, it wouldn't be so difficult, because difficult it is not. Get it? No? YOU'RE STUPID. Anyways, not is, in the fundamental sense. As I've stated earlier, nonexistance is the absence of existence. Being not is essentially the same thing, and thus committing the act of not being here, and if you weren't here, we wouldn't be able to make intelligent conversation, no? Yes. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to be reading this and your brain would be deprived of such saturation in the knowledge of the capability of controlling your own very being. That would be very sad, but I would be satisfied in knowing that I'll always be smarter than you, because you would be not, in the sense of not being. I suppose you could also comprehend that in the way of thinking you're not intelligent. That works too.

So the guy next to me is not.

boywhoflies wrote:So the guy next to me is not.

What guy next to you? HOW COULD YOU CONCLUDE SUCH A THING.

I mean, I'm alone in this room. There is no guy next to me.
It would of been eazyer to understand if I said that. Sorry.

The absence of not is not no absence of nothing, however. If you won't conclude that that isn't true, that wouldn't be very bad. If you don't have not then nothing cannot be absent. Get it? No? No. You're definitely indefinitely not getting it. That would not be not nothing.

~xpr'd~ wrote:If you don't have not

You cannot possess not. Not isn't a noun, it's an adjective, or an extensive of an adjective, eg: You are stinky. You are not. You are not stinky. Also, your wordplay(?) is unnecessary, repeating words and using double negatives and all. Let's talk sense instead of try to be confusing and be completely obvious (except towards illiterates), just like in the culminations of my posts. Judging from the past posts and rants of this topic, there are many illiterates, but let's leave that behind us, shall we? We want to feel optimistic, so that's what we shall be.

After reading this post, you will never again be able to trust existence and you will see with crystal clarity the way that each of these issues is central to the propagandism debate. I assume you already know that it wants people to be fined, exiled, or imprisoned for making snide remarks about its ploys so let me begin this post by remarking that what I wrote just a moment ago is not the paranoid rambling of an uncompromising wacko. It's a fact. existence has allowed itself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by pugnacious, bumptious morons, intemperate firebrands, and ignorant quacks while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system. existence's loyalists actually believe the bunkum they're always mouthing. That's because these types of sophomoric bullies are idealistic, have no sense of history or human nature, and they think that what they're doing will somehow improve the world within a short period of time. In reality, of course, existence's secret agents accept its egocentric views without question—and existence knows it. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

i cheated

Not is a logical operator and can turn the world upside down.

EXAMPLE OF USAGE:
NOT universe

*universe blows up*

Hmm? Not is not a logical operator. It is a possessive inverter, effectively debunking other existences by reversing their true meaning.

No, in logic gates, there is a NOT gate, which takes the input and inverts it.

1 NOT 0
0 NOT 1