Road Trip Theorem Part 1:
Given: Woke up on time
Prove: Long road trip awaits.
Statement
|
Reason
|
Awake at 6:06am
|
Given
|
Bag? Keys? Ticket? Umbrella?
|
Checklist Theorem, 40% < x < 52% chance of rain
|
Leave for airport at 6:47am
|
Corollary of Checklist Theorem: Impeccable Timing.
|
Read Street ≠ Reed Street.
|
Definition of Getting Lost
|
24 min driving in circles
|
Consequence of the previously stated definition
|
41 min per hour wasted.
|
Property of the Traffic Principle
|
Missed Flight
|
All of the above
|
Thoughts of not going
|
Anxiety Hypothesis
|
“Hello? What do you want Poetry?”
|
Miscalculation of gas money
|
Agreement to drive to together
|
Logical Solution
|
Poetry is Late
|
Common Axiom (Axiom #11)
|
Frustration at local Maxima
|
If X=frustration and Y=waiting, then Y=X2 with X>0
|
ஃ Long, disastrous, bicker-filled car ride.
Road Trip Theorem Part 2:
Dead Silence. Easy, peaceful, average=Mean, median, mode, and range. Range of motion, range of time. Time. 1 hour, 36 minutes, 24 seconds down. 6 hours, 3 minutes, 36 seconds to go. 35-34-33-32-31....31. Prime. Particular, pesky, perfect...Pun. “Let’s not act so primal” It was a calculated move. An addition of humor with a subtraction of tension. But all in return was a snippy comment that took things back to square 1. 1 squared is 1. Approximately 1/5 of the way there. Direct route at speed limit. Exact. There’s no formula for small talk. Why should we? We run in parallel, our lines should never cross. Poetry suggests another road will be better. Probability of him being correct? 1%. Efficiency is key.
Back to counting.
Road Trip Theorem Part 3:
Hypothesis: Math≥Poetry
Ex. A sharp 180° turn that should not have exceeded 136.4° caused an unnecessary flat tire. Great.
Ex. At this rate we’ll never make it one time.
Ex. (Air pressure×Angles)+Spare tire=Fixed car
Ex. Poetry is useless. Typical.
Hypothesis: Poetry≥Math
Ex. Equation for conversation: 1 question asked=1 question answered
Ex. Perfect symmetry of Poetry’s face
Ex. Poems might make sense. Be useful. Be inspiring.
Ex. Maybe Poetry is ok.
Can’t have one without the other. Can’t substitute one for the other. Integral parts of each other.
Road Trip Theorem Part 4:
Method 1 for Proof:
Staring out the window, a building springs out from nowhere. Poetry want’s to stop and take a look. I guess we can sacrifice a few minutes. Poetry and I seem to have different views of the building. I wonder if we are even looking at it from the same perspective.
I love building. Poetry loves building. Therefore, by the transitive property, I love Poetry.
Method 2 for Proof:
9x‒7M>3(3x‒7P)
9x‒7M>9x‒21P
‒7M>‒21P
‒M>‒3P
M<3P
Either way, simple math seems to agree. You+me=we and that’s what I’d rather be. ⬛ DONE.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Check out Poetry Blog (a sixth hour blog) sometime soon for Poetry's perspective! :D ~Maia
Haha this was an interesting take on the prompt. I like how methodical this was and how everything was purely logic, which is how a lot of scientists and math people see problems. I feel like a lot of science/math people draw their conclusions based solely on prove and hard fact, while literary people often like to interpret text and draw their own conclusions (which the thought process of Math doesn't leave room for). I'm interested to see how Poetry's perspective and writing style differs from Math's.
ReplyDeleteThis was such a good idea! I especially like how math still likes poetry even though they're very different. I agree with Lydia, I'd love to see poetry's idea of how the trip will go.
ReplyDeleteI love this. The Venn diagram is brilliant, and I like "An addition of humor with a subtraction of tension."
ReplyDeleteWow this is so cool (I finally looked at it)! I think your proofs would make Mr. Buck proud. I love your dual blog posts, this was such a creative idea. I feel like you nailed the whole math perspective, your writing is very logical and well presented.
ReplyDelete