... no, queer.garden opens just fine (although I COULD not open it from the URL bar????)

as far as I can tell?? this interim laptop is The Worst, but unrelatedly, both queer.party and queer.garden are like. HARD down

hey I don't use this account! follow me on @byttyrs@queer.party for current posts

instance recs?

I think I *am* gonna migrate from mastodon.cloud- I already bofa.lol'd up on @byttyrs@bofa.lol but hmu with instances w/:

• lots of gays and transes

• lots of fantasy fans

• lots of writers and artists

• a short, aesthetic instance URL

• a reasonably-active local timeline

I wish I could post bare booby #OnHere without fear of negative consequences because these tatas are Soft and Round and everyone cool should get a chance to feel them but y'all* just have to take my word on it??

*well, most of y'all

THE PRESTIGE:

ok so, the classical proof that

root(2) involves deriving a contradiction from the assumption that root(2) is rational.

however, there is an argument to be made that there is a difference between a number being [not rational], and actually provably belonging to the class of irrational numbers, i.e. quantifiably different in some way from every rational number.

(contd.)

alright folks as promised, here is the proof

Proposition:

Not all numbers can be expressed as a ratio of integers.

Proof:

Take the unit square, the square which has sides of length 1. By the Pythagorean Theorem, we know that the diagonal of this square is of length root(2). Assume that root(2) is a ratio of integers. This means that there is some nonzero number a, and some nonzero number b, such that a/b = root(2).

(contd.)

Vaguely-gay transsexual wombyn, 25. Incorrigible academic, incurable poet. Leninist? Into stuff like witchcraft, high-church Anglicanism, faggotry, and madness.

Joined Aug 2018