I’m pretty sure he was involved with the liberation theology movements in Argentina before the previous pope clamped down on it (in his capacity as a cardinal)

technically yes, but the proof would usually show that this works by constructing the bijection of [0,1] and (0,1) and then you’d say the cardinalities are the same by the Schröder-Berstein theorem, because the proof of the latter is likely not something you want to demonstrate every day

even if that’s not how you can write it, one gets the same issue in yours subtracting infinity from both sides

it’s actually Vulcan

ah, but don’t forget to prove that the cardinality of [0,1] is that same as that of (0,1) on the way!

no, there aren’t enough integers to map onto the interval (0,1).

probably the most famous proof for this is Cantor’s diagonalisation argument. though as it usually shows how the cardinality of the naturals is small than this interval, you’ll also need to prove that the cardinality of the integers is the same as that of the naturals too (which is usually seen when you go about constructing the set of integers to begin with)

actually you can for each real number you can exhaustively map a uninque number from the interval (0,1) onto it. (there are many such examples, you can find one way by playing around with the function tanx)

this means these two sets are of the same size by the mathematical definition of cardinality :)

actually that’s written with stone

well yeah, there’s only so much sexy to go around. how else do you propose we save some for spiders?

don’t forget ablutophobia

you’re assuming they’re doing it by accident

yeah, but where do you think that information comes from? that’s right, research. it’s research papers all the way down.

don’t get carried away by big research /s

that’s why he said: light years away

as in: there is still a great amount of distance Orban thinks Ukraine needs to cover before they converge with the EU admissions acceptability criteria

God, I can’t believe I just had to defend Orban

I like my potatoes raw thank you very much

every dollar you raise, the fewer customers you get. the point is that you should want to raise the price whenever the relative drop in customers is less than the relative increase in price to maximise profits (where marginal cost is marginal benefit :) )

some injustices are structural

that’s just a fancy way of saying:

imagine you have two children and live in a system of gavelkind succession. now consider the share of one of the children. then forget the children and make that share the new bank balance

I think the worry is a WW3 with China

I’m sure you do :)

That being said, by choosing not to break gender norms, are you not helping reinforce what an idea of female is?

(OK, maybe I’m going round in circles here)

Anyway, you have a lovely day :)

but isn’t the difference in one case free gender expression, whereas the other is (e.g. for trans male to female): I think I’m a woman and to show this I’m going to specifically dress in the ‘stereotypically womanliest’ way possible?

or, more generally, people shouldn’t be using gender as the reason to dress and act the way they want to. else they’re affirming that a certain gender means a certain form of acting.

obviously this is an exaggeration. but since we’re playing the game.