Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeff Hayden who wrote (57815)	10/13/2006 12:40:48 PM
From: Stock Puppy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213181

Expand on the word "massive". How many is "massive"? If we consider the minimal amount, initially I would presume more than one. We shouldn't consider fractional amounts - although some people are greater than others, we consider all to be equal and one. Let's assume the first premise, that massive should be a number greater than one. After all, two is twice one and compared to one, it is a lot and quite possible to consider that number to be massive. But lets try another tack and revisit one. One is infinitely greater than zero, multiplicably speaking - multiply zero by anything and you still get zero. Therefore anything greater than zero must be massive. As a test, you can try to multiply zero by infinity. What you'll get is a massive number of red-faced mathematicians running after you with machetes. In this case "massive" would be a quantity significantly greater than one. But even if you had a bleary eyed mathematicians running after you with a pencil, that would still constitute a massive number of them. Therefore, one could be considered massive. QED. So in conclusion, that must be what that guy whose name must not be mentioned considers to be a "massive" lawsuit.