Rock, paper or scissors?

[Nathan]

I always go with Rock.
What about you?​

 

[Uchiha Riyo]

Same here. But apart from that, scissors. I don't like paper, cuz even if paper covers rock, it doesn't do anything to it.

 

[99minutes]

Same here. But apart from that, scissors. I don't like paper, cuz even if paper covers rock, it doesn't do anything to it.

True, the idea is ridiculous :/
Einstein said in his "Theory of the Rock" that if you hold up a paper in front of your face and somebody throws a rock at you, it will not protect you at all D:

By using the equation E=R*S/P, we can find the logical reason behind all this. Theory is required, people

 

[99minutes]

CONVENTIONAL ROCK-PAPER-SCISSORS CONJECTURE:

The CRPSC is popularly examined in three ways: Rock vs Paper, Paper vs Sissors and Scissors vs Rock.

Rock vs Paper
Conventional rock-paper-scissors conjecture tells us that paper beats rock. This is explained by simple topology, the main concept being that paper is capable of wrapping around rock, thus making it disappear from observable existence.
Some people exert that it is possible for rock to beat paper by eventually putting holes in it, which would cause paper to cease to exist, as defined in the conjecture. Yet, what if the paper was made of kevlar? After all, the flat foldable thing is not specific in composition. The possibilities go on, much to the great annoyance of those trying to solve the problem.

Paper vs Scissors
There is no problem here. Scissors will always cut paper, even if it's made of kevlar as proven by Professor Stephen Hawking. Nowadays, Hawking tends to stay away from scissor-wielding maniacs.

Scissors vs Rock
By far the most heated debate ensues between scissors and rock. CRPSC tells us that rock beats scissors, but many people have considered the possibility of using scissors in such a way to find the weak-spots in a rock and thus destroy it without having to rely solely on brute force. These people are normally what mathematicians call "blithering morons", as it had be proven that such is impossible, even though it seems no one outside of the mathematician's circle knows this. It is a bit harsh, however, since the other group of people who proposes the aforementioned possibility are mathematicians on drugs.

In fact, drug-affected mathematics have long been the way much ground-breaking progress on CRPSC had been made. Complex numbers, surprisingly, were the most greatly utilized mathematical tool while mathematicians were on drugs. Apparently, it helped with the imaginary numbers involved in the equations of scissors. Rock needed no such complicated modeling, a rock is a rock. Kitten huffing happens to be a great alternative for mathematicians low on income.
String theorists have attempted to compute a hypothetical situation in which scissors could beat rock. Through a hypothetical formation of sharp string vibrations, these people suggest it possible for a rock to become entrapped within one of the rings of the scissor's handle, hypothetically. However, no one knows how on earth that could be brought about, nor if such a result would mathematically constitute a cease of existence for the rock; more importantly, nobody cares for strings. The most compelling argument, however, is that depending on how low the rock's rating on the Mohs hardness scale is, such as talc, scissors (of hardness 6) would be able to cut right through the rock. Most people, however, dismiss this as "balderdouche", again because strings are stupid. Who cares about strings? Really?
Recently, evidence has been uncoivered related to the construction of a pair of "Ultimate Scissors" named Fred sometime in the 1780's by the Knights Templar. However, most respectable scientists now agree that it was actually created by the Free Masons and/or Santa. Either way, such an artifact could theoretically violate the CRPSC, as it would be capable of rending not only paper, but rocks and lesser scissors. Most people choose to ignore this evidence, however, due to the dire consequences.

 

[Uchiha seeker]

Rock!

 

[Uchiha Riyo]

CONVENTIONAL ROCK-PAPER-SCISSORS CONJECTURE:

The CRPSC is popularly examined in three ways: Rock vs Paper, Paper vs Sissors and Scissors vs Rock.

Rock vs Paper
Conventional rock-paper-scissors conjecture tells us that paper beats rock. This is explained by simple topology, the main concept being that paper is capable of wrapping around rock, thus making it disappear from observable existence.
Some people exert that it is possible for rock to beat paper by eventually putting holes in it, which would cause paper to cease to exist, as defined in the conjecture. Yet, what if the paper was made of kevlar? After all, the flat foldable thing is not specific in composition. The possibilities go on, much to the great annoyance of those trying to solve the problem.

Paper vs Scissors
There is no problem here. Scissors will always cut paper, even if it's made of kevlar as proven by Professor Stephen Hawking. Nowadays, Hawking tends to stay away from scissor-wielding maniacs.

Scissors vs Rock
By far the most heated debate ensues between scissors and rock. CRPSC tells us that rock beats scissors, but many people have considered the possibility of using scissors in such a way to find the weak-spots in a rock and thus destroy it without having to rely solely on brute force. These people are normally what mathematicians call "blithering morons", as it had be proven that such is impossible, even though it seems no one outside of the mathematician's circle knows this. It is a bit harsh, however, since the other group of people who proposes the aforementioned possibility are mathematicians on drugs.

In fact, drug-affected mathematics have long been the way much ground-breaking progress on CRPSC had been made. Complex numbers, surprisingly, were the most greatly utilized mathematical tool while mathematicians were on drugs. Apparently, it helped with the imaginary numbers involved in the equations of scissors. Rock needed no such complicated modeling, a rock is a rock. Kitten huffing happens to be a great alternative for mathematicians low on income.
String theorists have attempted to compute a hypothetical situation in which scissors could beat rock. Through a hypothetical formation of sharp string vibrations, these people suggest it possible for a rock to become entrapped within one of the rings of the scissor's handle, hypothetically. However, no one knows how on earth that could be brought about, nor if such a result would mathematically constitute a cease of existence for the rock; more importantly, nobody cares for strings. The most compelling argument, however, is that depending on how low the rock's rating on the Mohs hardness scale is, such as talc, scissors (of hardness 6) would be able to cut right through the rock. Most people, however, dismiss this as "balderdouche", again because strings are stupid. Who cares about strings? Really?
Recently, evidence has been uncoivered related to the construction of a pair of "Ultimate Scissors" named Fred sometime in the 1780's by the Knights Templar. However, most respectable scientists now agree that it was actually created by the Free Masons and/or Santa. Either way, such an artifact could theoretically violate the CRPSC, as it would be capable of rending not only paper, but rocks and lesser scissors. Most people choose to ignore this evidence, however, due to the dire consequences.

Wow so much science and mathematics is involved in making a game huh? Sweet.

 

[Xentinel]

CONVENTIONAL ROCK-PAPER-SCISSORS CONJECTURE:

The CRPSC is popularly examined in three ways: Rock vs Paper, Paper vs Sissors and Scissors vs Rock.

Rock vs Paper
Conventional rock-paper-scissors conjecture tells us that paper beats rock. This is explained by simple topology, the main concept being that paper is capable of wrapping around rock, thus making it disappear from observable existence.
Some people exert that it is possible for rock to beat paper by eventually putting holes in it, which would cause paper to cease to exist, as defined in the conjecture. Yet, what if the paper was made of kevlar? After all, the flat foldable thing is not specific in composition. The possibilities go on, much to the great annoyance of those trying to solve the problem.

Paper vs Scissors
There is no problem here. Scissors will always cut paper, even if it's made of kevlar as proven by Professor Stephen Hawking. Nowadays, Hawking tends to stay away from scissor-wielding maniacs.

Scissors vs Rock
By far the most heated debate ensues between scissors and rock. CRPSC tells us that rock beats scissors, but many people have considered the possibility of using scissors in such a way to find the weak-spots in a rock and thus destroy it without having to rely solely on brute force. These people are normally what mathematicians call "blithering morons", as it had be proven that such is impossible, even though it seems no one outside of the mathematician's circle knows this. It is a bit harsh, however, since the other group of people who proposes the aforementioned possibility are mathematicians on drugs.

In fact, drug-affected mathematics have long been the way much ground-breaking progress on CRPSC had been made. Complex numbers, surprisingly, were the most greatly utilized mathematical tool while mathematicians were on drugs. Apparently, it helped with the imaginary numbers involved in the equations of scissors. Rock needed no such complicated modeling, a rock is a rock. Kitten huffing happens to be a great alternative for mathematicians low on income.
String theorists have attempted to compute a hypothetical situation in which scissors could beat rock. Through a hypothetical formation of sharp string vibrations, these people suggest it possible for a rock to become entrapped within one of the rings of the scissor's handle, hypothetically. However, no one knows how on earth that could be brought about, nor if such a result would mathematically constitute a cease of existence for the rock; more importantly, nobody cares for strings. The most compelling argument, however, is that depending on how low the rock's rating on the Mohs hardness scale is, such as talc, scissors (of hardness 6) would be able to cut right through the rock. Most people, however, dismiss this as "balderdouche", again because strings are stupid. Who cares about strings? Really?
Recently, evidence has been uncoivered related to the construction of a pair of "Ultimate Scissors" named Fred sometime in the 1780's by the Knights Templar. However, most respectable scientists now agree that it was actually created by the Free Masons and/or Santa. Either way, such an artifact could theoretically violate the CRPSC, as it would be capable of rending not only paper, but rocks and lesser scissors. Most people choose to ignore this evidence, however, due to the dire consequences.

I guess u drink too much .. good theory btw.

 

[Nathan]

Spoiler

CONVENTIONAL ROCK-PAPER-SCISSORS CONJECTURE:

The CRPSC is popularly examined in three ways: Rock vs Paper, Paper vs Sissors and Scissors vs Rock.

Rock vs Paper
Conventional rock-paper-scissors conjecture tells us that paper beats rock. This is explained by simple topology, the main concept being that paper is capable of wrapping around rock, thus making it disappear from observable existence.
Some people exert that it is possible for rock to beat paper by eventually putting holes in it, which would cause paper to cease to exist, as defined in the conjecture. Yet, what if the paper was made of kevlar? After all, the flat foldable thing is not specific in composition. The possibilities go on, much to the great annoyance of those trying to solve the problem.

Paper vs Scissors
There is no problem here. Scissors will always cut paper, even if it's made of kevlar as proven by Professor Stephen Hawking. Nowadays, Hawking tends to stay away from scissor-wielding maniacs.

Scissors vs Rock
By far the most heated debate ensues between scissors and rock. CRPSC tells us that rock beats scissors, but many people have considered the possibility of using scissors in such a way to find the weak-spots in a rock and thus destroy it without having to rely solely on brute force. These people are normally what mathematicians call "blithering morons", as it had be proven that such is impossible, even though it seems no one outside of the mathematician's circle knows this. It is a bit harsh, however, since the other group of people who proposes the aforementioned possibility are mathematicians on drugs.

In fact, drug-affected mathematics have long been the way much ground-breaking progress on CRPSC had been made. Complex numbers, surprisingly, were the most greatly utilized mathematical tool while mathematicians were on drugs. Apparently, it helped with the imaginary numbers involved in the equations of scissors. Rock needed no such complicated modeling, a rock is a rock. Kitten huffing happens to be a great alternative for mathematicians low on income.
String theorists have attempted to compute a hypothetical situation in which scissors could beat rock. Through a hypothetical formation of sharp string vibrations, these people suggest it possible for a rock to become entrapped within one of the rings of the scissor's handle, hypothetically. However, no one knows how on earth that could be brought about, nor if such a result would mathematically constitute a cease of existence for the rock; more importantly, nobody cares for strings. The most compelling argument, however, is that depending on how low the rock's rating on the Mohs hardness scale is, such as talc, scissors (of hardness 6) would be able to cut right through the rock. Most people, however, dismiss this as "balderdouche", again because strings are stupid. Who cares about strings? Really?
Recently, evidence has been uncoivered related to the construction of a pair of "Ultimate Scissors" named Fred sometime in the 1780's by the Knights Templar. However, most respectable scientists now agree that it was actually created by the Free Masons and/or Santa. Either way, such an artifact could theoretically violate the CRPSC, as it would be capable of rending not only paper, but rocks and lesser scissors. Most people choose to ignore this evidence, however, due to the dire consequences.

And what site did you copy that off. xd

But you do get another taco for your efforts.

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

 

[Nyanmaru]

O_O Guns. Pew pew.

 

[JyiSMILEseven]

O_O Guns. Pew pew.

^
xd

I go with rock... It can give someone a coma and is destructive! xd

 

[99minutes]

I guess u drink too much .. good theory btw.

xD AHAHAHA! Yes, thank you!
I was waiting for someone to notice the ridiculous crap I posted and comment +rep, bud.

Oh, and +rep to that other guy, too. The one with the hat avatar xD

 

[Uchiha Riyo]

xD AHAHAHA! Yes, thank you!
I was waiting for someone to notice the ridiculous crap I posted and comment +rep, bud.

Oh, and +rep to that other guy, too. The one with the hat avatar xD

Shotties! You too btw. Good theory, wether you copid it or not xd

 

[Uchiha Riyo]

True, the idea is ridiculous :/
Einstein said in his "Theory of the Rock" that if you hold up a paper in front of your face and somebody throws a rock at you, it will not protect you at all D:

By using the equation E=R*S/P, we can find the logical reason behind all this. Theory is required, people

Hey guys Sheldon Cooper's on NB...

 

[PaulJ5]

..got this from someone!!

..rock>scissor>paper>rock.. etc.
..snakes>toads>slugs>snakes.. etc. (I kinda dont agree a bit but just sharing)
..and yah.. I always go with rocks

 

[Abysmal.]

Which ever counters the opposing hand :|

Here is a challenge:
Play this game against yourself.

Or add a twist:
Rock=Punch
Paper=Slap
Scissors=O_O God knows what this is, just don't choose it.