gravity+bikes+motion=fun! (unless you fall off the bike that is). *high fives for biking and not driving*

wow...

that's an amazing photo

--
~Michelle.

Lets look at this a little more carefully:

gravity + bikes + motion = fun
(spacetime * fun) + (vehicles * fun) + (mass * fun) = fun
(spacetime + vehicles + mass)fun = fun
spacetime + vehicles + mass = 1
vehicles - 1 = spacetime + mass

But since e=mc*c then our spacetime and mass there give us all the relevant constituants to building our universe. Further more, on a students budget one can only assume that if i was driving, that i could only afford one vehicle. Thus, (vehicles -1) implies not driving, and thus we have:

not driving = all known contituents of the known universe

from this we can reason that taking the negation of both sides would give:

driving = no universe left

While i figured that driving cars would mess up the planet, who knew it was messing up the whole universe.

"High fives for biking and not driving" is right.

--
---colin--->

thanks

--
---colin--->

i tip my hat to you sir... although I know nothing about math (except for the stats course I took last year)i would also factor in the safety-- bikes travel at slower speeds than cars, and if wearing the proper protective headgear, i'd wager a bike collision would be far less likely to be fatal than the ones possible in a motorized vehicle. lol

I think your formula should be taught throughout Canadian curricula at both primary and secondary levels!

*hands you a nobel prize*

I really like that picture, but I think I like your proof better.

i totally don’t deserve it.
i just found an error in my proof:

spacetime + vehicles + mass = 1

implies:
spacetime + vehicles = 1 - vehicles
not:
vehicles - 1 = spacetime + mass

this will inevitably change the results. how embarrassing.... my apologies to the scientific community.

--
---colin--->

...frig.. i gotta go reprint all those textbooks now

...frig.. i gotta go reprint all those textbooks now