This Thread will have #1000 by 05/07/07

<p>unless we all abandon our responsibilities and hw, etc..this will never reach 2k in 24 hrs.</p>

<p>I dont see u applying this technique stuck-on-1700</p>

<p>We're BEYOND 1/4 of the way there already since late last night when 1K was reached...without a concerted effort.</p>

<p>jads;kljfa;ldskjf;adsklj;klasjf;kljsd;klfjsdkljfds;lkdsj;kldsia;ojsefasfasffkldsadsadsfkladsfs</p>

<p>I never said I would be doig it...</p>

<p>Doing what, S-O-17?</p>

<p>Lol, abandoning the thread...:p:p:p</p>

<p>Yeah, i cant pull it off either</p>

<p>Yawn.
The new discussion thread is boring as of now.
Maybe later.
Is everyone jumping ship? No 2000?</p>

<p>^And you just killed this thread</p>

<p>thread murderer
u should be ashamed...a thread has to be killed only when there is mutual consensus</p>

<p>Yay, everybody's offline, I have this baby all to myself.</p>

<p>I'm going to take this baby to 1300. I don't care if this thread is dead or not, I'll take it.</p>

<p>Hmmm...what should I talk about...</p>

<p>Well, I just wanted to take a break...and I'm done. Maybe I'll go to some other "living" thread, and kill it. Then I'll earn the nickname of "thread killer," and you guys can call me T-Money, or better yet, T-BONE, and I'll say "Grrrrr, yeah, I'm bad, I'm mean, you know it!"</p>

<p>Hello everyone.</p>

<p>Oh, great timing Mr. Killer. Superlative, you stole my thunder.</p>

<p>In threads like these, threadkillers never actually kill threads b/c there's always some know-it-all who feels like s/he has to tell said threadkiller that s/he killed the threat.
And life goes on.</p>

<p>I wonder sometimes...if you visit the back pages of a forum...how many threads are there in which I was the person who posted last in that thread. I think there are quite a few. It's like I have virtual BO and virtual halitosis and everyone cleared the thread.</p>

<p>I think 2K is possible if people just talked.</p>

<p>For instance, I'd like to know if this statement is true: </p>

<p>"Whenever two electrons collide, each instantly reverses direction, losing no time or velocity."</p>

<p>Doesn't the velocity have to hit 0 in order to reverse direction? Or does instantly mean instantly? This would be fascinating, if true, because then I would want to apply that dynamic on a larger scale and figure out practical applications for instantaneous vector reversals that have no wasted time or velocity. For instance, round trip flights would be awesome.</p>

<p>Or does everyone not follow what I'm getting at? Where are ChaosTheory and asifkhan when you need them? They're great at making their presence known when you don't need them...so why not here? And now?</p>

<p>Jambo. :) /<em>cool</em>/</p>

<p>D'yer - Are you applying to HCSSiM? ;)</p>

<p>What does Jambo mean????</p>