Because it is not a question worth discussing
forum
Are traps actually gay?
posted
Total Posts
61
My answer was extremely logicalUntitled wrote:
All these replies, but still no SOLID ANSWER!
dNextGen
Hello, I'm ColdTooth. Today we'll be discussing the topic of "Are Traps Gay?"
As a scientist who researches in this topic, both out of interaction and within, I have discovered that traps are gay. Let's begin the quick and painless study, shall we?
It all dates back to my original scientific research. Two magnets. See, one of the magnet had much more attraction to it, and it was slightly bigger than the other magnet, which had a negative attraction. A positive and a negative attraction means that the relationship of these two electromagnetic fields is a guaranteed true relationship. This means that the two forces will collide with each other, no matter what happens, whether it be a wall, a sheet of metal, or glass.
Back up a moment... I said "sheet of metal". These two can find each other's attractions from the other side of the metal piece, given that the sheet is no thicker than 0.0056 centimeters. No, there won't be any math today, put away your calculator. Now, back to the study. I also mentioned a wall, that's obviously a million times thicker than 0.0056 centimeters. That's only if the attraction between these two is at an extreme point, but that's for another lesson.
I then pulled out two of the same magnets, both positive attractions. Strange things began to happen, they pushed each other away, and the forces between these two were so large that if the did end up touching, and then let go, the pieces went flying on opposite sides. This was kind of strange to discover, my face was... baffled. I did the same thing to the negative attractions, and the same thing happened. I had a bright idea, an idea that would've changed history. That idea, was not only the first idea that came into mind, but the only idea that worked. So much so, that the lab eventually exploded days later.
See, in order to have a relationship with these magnets, you need a positive and negative attraction so that they will link together. That's not so hard, but let's assume you only have one kind of attraction, the positive force. What then? Well, with a few hours of research, I came to the conclusion that these attractions, can be changed... So I did what science can not explain. I changed one of the positive attractions to become negative. It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction.
So now one of the positive attractions is a negative one, still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive. When it links up to the other positive attraction, the one that has not changed, the two attractions meet up. This wasn't supposed to happen, but I slowly figured out that the attractions can change via testing, and therefore, creating a different relationship. I called this relationship a 'false relationship', though it's still a relationship, don't be confused! It's just a different relationship.
The next day, I decided to experiment on the same attractions that I had played with, and turns out, one of these was getting more and more negative attraction, while the other one kept it's positive force. It's so weird that a positive attraction can be changed into a negative attraction, but still posing as a positive attraction. That is why traps are gay. Thank you.
As a scientist who researches in this topic, both out of interaction and within, I have discovered that traps are gay. Let's begin the quick and painless study, shall we?
It all dates back to my original scientific research. Two magnets. See, one of the magnet had much more attraction to it, and it was slightly bigger than the other magnet, which had a negative attraction. A positive and a negative attraction means that the relationship of these two electromagnetic fields is a guaranteed true relationship. This means that the two forces will collide with each other, no matter what happens, whether it be a wall, a sheet of metal, or glass.
Back up a moment... I said "sheet of metal". These two can find each other's attractions from the other side of the metal piece, given that the sheet is no thicker than 0.0056 centimeters. No, there won't be any math today, put away your calculator. Now, back to the study. I also mentioned a wall, that's obviously a million times thicker than 0.0056 centimeters. That's only if the attraction between these two is at an extreme point, but that's for another lesson.
I then pulled out two of the same magnets, both positive attractions. Strange things began to happen, they pushed each other away, and the forces between these two were so large that if the did end up touching, and then let go, the pieces went flying on opposite sides. This was kind of strange to discover, my face was... baffled. I did the same thing to the negative attractions, and the same thing happened. I had a bright idea, an idea that would've changed history. That idea, was not only the first idea that came into mind, but the only idea that worked. So much so, that the lab eventually exploded days later.
See, in order to have a relationship with these magnets, you need a positive and negative attraction so that they will link together. That's not so hard, but let's assume you only have one kind of attraction, the positive force. What then? Well, with a few hours of research, I came to the conclusion that these attractions, can be changed... So I did what science can not explain. I changed one of the positive attractions to become negative. It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction.
So now one of the positive attractions is a negative one, still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive. When it links up to the other positive attraction, the one that has not changed, the two attractions meet up. This wasn't supposed to happen, but I slowly figured out that the attractions can change via testing, and therefore, creating a different relationship. I called this relationship a 'false relationship', though it's still a relationship, don't be confused! It's just a different relationship.
The next day, I decided to experiment on the same attractions that I had played with, and turns out, one of these was getting more and more negative attraction, while the other one kept it's positive force. It's so weird that a positive attraction can be changed into a negative attraction, but still posing as a positive attraction. That is why traps are gay. Thank you.
argh too lazy to read all of that, but yes
Hold up. I see a fatal flaw in this experiment, one that is easily overlooked but that ruins your whole set of data. I'm a philosopher, not a scientist, but I can still hold my own in a discussion.
In your post, you attempt to scientifically prove with magnets that traps are gay. Before I even start to analyse your post, I will say this: there is no correlation between human beings and magnets until you prove it. I could be comparing traps to airplanes and my argument would not have any less weight or validity than yours does.
Now that that's out of the way, let's talk about your experiment. In your tests, you mask the first magnet's (let's call it Magnet A) positive charge with a negative charge, in order to confuse the other magnet (let's call it Magnet B) and trick it into thinking that Magnet A is displaying a negative charge. You call this "gay" (which, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, means "of, relating to, or used by homosexuals", but in this case, I think we can all agree to define "gay" as "To be "gay" is to be attracted to the same charge as one's own"). But is it really gay for Magnet B? Think about it: all Magnet B knows is that it is attracted to a negative, and it thinks that this is normal, because Magnet B is displaying a positive charge. Magnet B is not aware, nor does it care, that Magnet A is actually another positive charge. To Magnet B, it is a positive charge attracted to a negative charge, which is not gay, so I would argue that Magnet B is not gay. Here is the formal argument:
Secondly, let's discuss Magnet A. Magnet A is displaying a negative charge, although it possesses a positive one. It is attracting another positive charge from this act. I would argue that this is not "gay" either. You see, by the definition given above, Magnet A is not gay. This is because it is displaying an outward negative charge, and so that charge is the only one that matters at the moment, because Magnet B cannot see the positive charge, only the negative charge. In other words, because the positive charge is cloaked, it is inactive and therefore moot. For all intents and purposes, Magnet A possesses a negative charge. Therefore, because Magnet A has a negative charge and Magnet B has a positive one, Magnet A is not gay. Here is the formal argument:
I have just proved that neither Magnet B nor Magnet A are gay.
In your post, you attempt to scientifically prove with magnets that traps are gay. Before I even start to analyse your post, I will say this: there is no correlation between human beings and magnets until you prove it. I could be comparing traps to airplanes and my argument would not have any less weight or validity than yours does.
Now that that's out of the way, let's talk about your experiment. In your tests, you mask the first magnet's (let's call it Magnet A) positive charge with a negative charge, in order to confuse the other magnet (let's call it Magnet B) and trick it into thinking that Magnet A is displaying a negative charge. You call this "gay" (which, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, means "of, relating to, or used by homosexuals", but in this case, I think we can all agree to define "gay" as "To be "gay" is to be attracted to the same charge as one's own"). But is it really gay for Magnet B? Think about it: all Magnet B knows is that it is attracted to a negative, and it thinks that this is normal, because Magnet B is displaying a positive charge. Magnet B is not aware, nor does it care, that Magnet A is actually another positive charge. To Magnet B, it is a positive charge attracted to a negative charge, which is not gay, so I would argue that Magnet B is not gay. Here is the formal argument:
1. To be "gay" is to be attracted to the same charge as one's own.
2. Magnet B is attracted to Magnet A's negative charge.
3. Magnet B is not attracted to the same charge as its own.
4. Therefore, Magnet B is not gay.
Secondly, let's discuss Magnet A. Magnet A is displaying a negative charge, although it possesses a positive one. It is attracting another positive charge from this act. I would argue that this is not "gay" either. You see, by the definition given above, Magnet A is not gay. This is because it is displaying an outward negative charge, and so that charge is the only one that matters at the moment, because Magnet B cannot see the positive charge, only the negative charge. In other words, because the positive charge is cloaked, it is inactive and therefore moot. For all intents and purposes, Magnet A possesses a negative charge. Therefore, because Magnet A has a negative charge and Magnet B has a positive one, Magnet A is not gay. Here is the formal argument:
1. To be "gay" is to be attracted to the same charge as one's own.
2. Magnet A and Magnet B are attracted to each other.
3. For all intents and purposes, Magnet A possesses a negative charge, as opposed to Magnet B that possesses a positive charge.
4. Magnet A is not attracted to the same charge as its own.
5. Therefore, Magnet A is not gay.
I have just proved that neither Magnet B nor Magnet A are gay.
Postal Script
This proof only works if Magnet A keeps its positive charge cloaked. If a) Magnet A's positive charge is revealed, and b) one or both Magnets are still attracted to each other, then that Magnet is gay.
Now I have no choice but to intervene in this matter as OT Royal Scientist. I have read both dissertations and while johnmedina999's proof in Coldtooth's inability to relate magnets to traps holds up, johnmedina999 misinterpreted the results of Coldtooth's experiment.
First, it is impossible to cloak a charge unless there is something to a) redirect it, or b) cancel it out. Coldtooth clearly states the experimental procedure is to change positive attraction to negative attraction by infusing it with a negative attraction from a sample of another negative attraction. The results of such must be clear: Infuse enough of the negatively attracted sample, and it overwhelms the positive attraction. This is strictly confirmed by the Coldtooth's description of the resultant product, "still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive." Therefore, there is no cloaking occurring. This results in the other two options, which happen to be both correct: Magnet A's positive charge is revealed, and one or both Magnets are still attracted to each other. How this is possible is a matter of an ancient principle the Greeks first postulated.
Second, you interpret the added sample not to be a part of Magnet A. A modular component which part of a bigger object it fits to is by no means the object itself, however, consider Coldtooth's resultant product due to the procedure adding the sample to Magnet A. Coldtooth states, 'It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction." It is no longer something that can be taken apart. Yes, you may be able to identify the sections in which there is a positive charge and a negative charge, but by no means are these sections separate object anymore as they are bound to one another. Question whether Magnet A's inherited sample constitutes as the same object you may as much as wish, but in that case consult Theseus's paradox.
If Coldtooth successfully demonstrates the relationship between magnets and traps, the results must be interpreted as the following: "Traps inherit the 'gayness' from a subject of the opposite gender by making it part of themselves".
First, it is impossible to cloak a charge unless there is something to a) redirect it, or b) cancel it out. Coldtooth clearly states the experimental procedure is to change positive attraction to negative attraction by infusing it with a negative attraction from a sample of another negative attraction. The results of such must be clear: Infuse enough of the negatively attracted sample, and it overwhelms the positive attraction. This is strictly confirmed by the Coldtooth's description of the resultant product, "still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive." Therefore, there is no cloaking occurring. This results in the other two options, which happen to be both correct: Magnet A's positive charge is revealed, and one or both Magnets are still attracted to each other. How this is possible is a matter of an ancient principle the Greeks first postulated.
Second, you interpret the added sample not to be a part of Magnet A. A modular component which part of a bigger object it fits to is by no means the object itself, however, consider Coldtooth's resultant product due to the procedure adding the sample to Magnet A. Coldtooth states, 'It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction." It is no longer something that can be taken apart. Yes, you may be able to identify the sections in which there is a positive charge and a negative charge, but by no means are these sections separate object anymore as they are bound to one another. Question whether Magnet A's inherited sample constitutes as the same object you may as much as wish, but in that case consult Theseus's paradox.
If Coldtooth successfully demonstrates the relationship between magnets and traps, the results must be interpreted as the following: "Traps inherit the 'gayness' from a subject of the opposite gender by making it part of themselves".
fair pointiSlodinx wrote:
.
because no words, i dont have wordsabraker wrote:
fair pointiSlodinx wrote:
.
Zeva[FL] wrote:
Trap is not gay if you say "NO HOMO" first
Hwa Yang wrote:
not even (theoretically) saying no homo can stop you from being gay as fuck
Not as long as you remember to say no homo
to sum up, you can put females and males together, but not males and males (scientifically). but if you make the male look like a female, then the other male can't tell shit. but the male dressing up as a female needs to make themselves more feminine to pull off the disguise.ColdTooth wrote:
Hello, I'm ColdTooth. Today we'll be discussing the topic of "Are Traps Gay?"
As a scientist who researches in this topic, both out of interaction and within, I have discovered that traps are gay. Let's begin the quick and painless study, shall we?
It all dates back to my original scientific research. Two magnets. See, one of the magnet had much more attraction to it, and it was slightly bigger than the other magnet, which had a negative attraction. A positive and a negative attraction means that the relationship of these two electromagnetic fields is a guaranteed true relationship. This means that the two forces will collide with each other, no matter what happens, whether it be a wall, a sheet of metal, or glass.
Back up a moment... I said "sheet of metal". These two can find each other's attractions from the other side of the metal piece, given that the sheet is no thicker than 0.0056 centimeters. No, there won't be any math today, put away your calculator. Now, back to the study. I also mentioned a wall, that's obviously a million times thicker than 0.0056 centimeters. That's only if the attraction between these two is at an extreme point, but that's for another lesson.
I then pulled out two of the same magnets, both positive attractions. Strange things began to happen, they pushed each other away, and the forces between these two were so large that if the did end up touching, and then let go, the pieces went flying on opposite sides. This was kind of strange to discover, my face was... baffled. I did the same thing to the negative attractions, and the same thing happened. I had a bright idea, an idea that would've changed history. That idea, was not only the first idea that came into mind, but the only idea that worked. So much so, that the lab eventually exploded days later.
See, in order to have a relationship with these magnets, you need a positive and negative attraction so that they will link together. That's not so hard, but let's assume you only have one kind of attraction, the positive force. What then? Well, with a few hours of research, I came to the conclusion that these attractions, can be changed... So I did what science can not explain. I changed one of the positive attractions to become negative. It still holds it's original attraction, but has been infused with a negative attraction from sampling another negative attraction.
So now one of the positive attractions is a negative one, still keeping it's original attraction, the positive one, but the negativity outweighing the positive. When it links up to the other positive attraction, the one that has not changed, the two attractions meet up. This wasn't supposed to happen, but I slowly figured out that the attractions can change via testing, and therefore, creating a different relationship. I called this relationship a 'false relationship', though it's still a relationship, don't be confused! It's just a different relationship.
The next day, I decided to experiment on the same attractions that I had played with, and turns out, one of these was getting more and more negative attraction, while the other one kept it's positive force. It's so weird that a positive attraction can be changed into a negative attraction, but still posing as a positive attraction. That is why traps are gay. Thank you.
ColdTooth wrote:
That is why traps are gay. Thank you.
owo?
I'm out.LakesideMiners wrote:
owo?
this thread went from aids to shit to aids to interesting to acceptable to shit and then back again in the space of only 46 posts
consider myself impressed
also you're all exiled
consider myself impressed
also you're all exiled
If you let things be, you will realize how much of a boiling soup OT is. Quality fluctuates on whim of chance and there is no telling when quality will rise and fall.
Your exile system is pretty much obsolete at this point lmaoEphemeral wrote:
this thread went from aids to shit to aids to interesting to acceptable to shit and then back again in the space of only 46 posts
consider myself impressed
also you're all exiled
fixed linkSerraionga wrote:
traps are traps
DJ Enetro wrote:
Ephemeral wrote:
this thread went from aids to shit to aids to interesting to acceptable to shit and then back again in the space of only 46 posts
consider myself impressed
also you're all exiled
Your exile system is pretty much obsolete at this point lmao
you're double exiled
10000 years dungeon
fuck gives a who
Hello overlord, I'd like to point out the documentation about hiring a spider in the exile system. Chop a leg off of the spider for every exile. Make sure it's a huntsman spider, that way everyone will be exiled. Also, please highlight everything in pink from now on, I've gifted you lots of pink highlighters in your office. Enjoy.Ephemeral wrote:
this thread went from aids to shit to aids to interesting to acceptable to shit and then back again in the space of only 46 posts
consider myself impressed
also you're all exiled