Upload
YouTube Videos
Funny Pictures
Funny GIFs
Funny Text
Funny Movies
Channels
Search
Search
Login or register
Logout
Settings
I (
0
)
Subs (
0
)
Favs (
0
)
Friends (
0
)
Login or register
reset password
Stay logged in
Log in/Sign up using Facebook.
Log in/Sign up using Gmail/Google+.
CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT
Email is optional and is used for password recovery purposes.
Captcha Code:
PMs (
0
)
Create Channel
lulzpitbullz
vidyagaems
OneForAll
4chan
politics
animemanga
webcomics
TumblrContent
marvel
AnimeLewds
monstergirls
pokemon
warhammer40k
gameofthrones
aww
military
FJNN
doggos
occomicmakers
SVTFOE
8chan
funny
VideogameLewds
CuteKemonomimis
cringechannel
SplatoonTime
dankwebms
zawarldo
CartoonGoodness
overwatchtime
initialD
bendingtime
videogames
art
polandball
dccomics
humanityfyeah
WholesomeMemes
ponytime
trump
kancolle
rwby
stevenuniverse
rickandmorty
fallout
BorderlineLewds
educational
gravityfalls
mullacllahdoow
Rank #10189 on Comments
Level 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Offline
Send mail to mullacllahdoow
Block mullacllahdoow
Unblock mullacllahdoow
Invite mullacllahdoow to be your friend
Last status update:

Gender:
male
Age:
26
Date Signed Up:
7/21/2011
Last Login:
8/20/2017
Stats
Comment Ranking:
#10189
Highest Content Rank:
#6109
Highest Comment Rank:
#2732
Content Thumbs:
26
total, 38
, 12
Comment Thumbs:
3660
total, 3791
, 131
Content Level Progress:
42.37% (25/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress:
42% (42/100)
Level 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 232 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:
0
Content Views:
3868
Times Content Favorited:
1 times
Total Comments Made:
585
FJ Points:
3152
What people say about mullacllahdoow
latest user's comments
#12
 Picture
[+]
(2 replies)
05/15/2015 on
Play With The Dog
+7
#14

medxforme
(05/15/2015)
[]
#29

zackshadows
(05/15/2015)
[]
Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck
#50
 Where he said "a woman is trouble" I was literally j…
[+]
(1 reply)
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
0
#52

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
... math wizards are debating my comment
#49
 Comment deleted
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
0
#40
 and W*2 = W+W... what I said was for W*2 = W^2 that requir…
[+]
(4 replies)
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
+2
#49

mullacllahdoow
has deleted their comment.
#48

racetothebottom
(05/14/2015)
[]
jesus christ you're all missing the point
W is not equal to T
W and T are related, but that doesn't mean they're equal
like please point out where the first comment said W=T
W*x = T^x
is that so difficult to understand?
#50

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Where he said "a woman is trouble" I was literally just making a "funny" (clearly not funny) observation from a mathematical standpoint. I didn't mean to start a debate on the difference between linear and exponential relationships and how to properly define said relationship.
I understood what he was getting at
#52

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
... math wizards are debating my comment
#26
 no sweat man, maths is my thing, unfair advantage
[+]
(6 replies)
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
0
#38

tolikbro
(05/14/2015)
[]
Set W=T
It just depends on whether you decide to do W*W or W+W.
In the first case, two women = T^2
In the second case, two women = 2T
Trouble squared or twice the trouble, all depends on how you want to combine the women.
#40

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
and W*2 = W+W... what I said was for
W*2 = W^2 that requires W=2 and hence T=2
again, is was supposed to be a joke... but since everyone is so insistant that I'm wrong.
for a relationship for increasing women linearly to result in exponential growth of trouble you'd require:
let T = trouble and let T=x i.e. a large number representing trouble caused by 1 woman. then:
T = x^W
i.e. for 2 women: T = x^2
for 3 women T= x^3
etc...
The original post said W*2 (i.e. W+W) = T^2. Not mathematically correct if T=W.
#49

mullacllahdoow
has deleted their comment.
#48

racetothebottom
(05/14/2015)
[]
jesus christ you're all missing the point
W is not equal to T
W and T are related, but that doesn't mean they're equal
like please point out where the first comment said W=T
W*x = T^x
is that so difficult to understand?
#50

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Where he said "a woman is trouble" I was literally just making a "funny" (clearly not funny) observation from a mathematical standpoint. I didn't mean to start a debate on the difference between linear and exponential relationships and how to properly define said relationship.
I understood what he was getting at
#52

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
... math wizards are debating my comment
#23
 Also, you might want to check what your own source tells you b…
[+]
(1 reply)
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
+1
#24

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
well shit.
#22
 ok, no... W*2/W = 2 W^2/W = W... a * denot…
[+]
(9 replies)
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
+1
#51

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
i did not understand thanks for explaining
#25

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
i swear im getting retarded everyday, i should stop surrounding myself with retarded people
#26

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
no sweat man, maths is my thing, unfair advantage
#38

tolikbro
(05/14/2015)
[]
Set W=T
It just depends on whether you decide to do W*W or W+W.
In the first case, two women = T^2
In the second case, two women = 2T
Trouble squared or twice the trouble, all depends on how you want to combine the women.
#40

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
and W*2 = W+W... what I said was for
W*2 = W^2 that requires W=2 and hence T=2
again, is was supposed to be a joke... but since everyone is so insistant that I'm wrong.
for a relationship for increasing women linearly to result in exponential growth of trouble you'd require:
let T = trouble and let T=x i.e. a large number representing trouble caused by 1 woman. then:
T = x^W
i.e. for 2 women: T = x^2
for 3 women T= x^3
etc...
The original post said W*2 (i.e. W+W) = T^2. Not mathematically correct if T=W.
#49

mullacllahdoow
has deleted their comment.
#48

racetothebottom
(05/14/2015)
[]
jesus christ you're all missing the point
W is not equal to T
W and T are related, but that doesn't mean they're equal
like please point out where the first comment said W=T
W*x = T^x
is that so difficult to understand?
#50

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Where he said "a woman is trouble" I was literally just making a "funny" (clearly not funny) observation from a mathematical standpoint. I didn't mean to start a debate on the difference between linear and exponential relationships and how to properly define said relationship.
I understood what he was getting at
#52

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
... math wizards are debating my comment
#14
 T^2 = T * T if T = W and T^2 = W*2 then W*2 …
[+]
(14 replies)
05/14/2015 on
Happiness
+1
#53

anon
(05/15/2015)
[]
Guys, no one said W=T
#19

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
you divided wrong, its ((w*2)/w)=w ,
also
here is a nifty site to do that,
www.wolframalpha.com/
#23

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Also, you might want to check what your own source tells you before you tell me I'm wrong
www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28w*2%29%2Fw
#24

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
well shit.
#22

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
ok, no... W*2/W = 2
W^2/W = W...
a * denotes multiply.
Source. I have a Maths degree. also... my reply was (clearly a bad) attempt at humour. not intended to be analysed.
#51

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
i did not understand thanks for explaining
#25

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
i swear im getting retarded everyday, i should stop surrounding myself with retarded people
#26

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
no sweat man, maths is my thing, unfair advantage
#38

tolikbro
(05/14/2015)
[]
Set W=T
It just depends on whether you decide to do W*W or W+W.
In the first case, two women = T^2
In the second case, two women = 2T
Trouble squared or twice the trouble, all depends on how you want to combine the women.
#40

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
and W*2 = W+W... what I said was for
W*2 = W^2 that requires W=2 and hence T=2
again, is was supposed to be a joke... but since everyone is so insistant that I'm wrong.
for a relationship for increasing women linearly to result in exponential growth of trouble you'd require:
let T = trouble and let T=x i.e. a large number representing trouble caused by 1 woman. then:
T = x^W
i.e. for 2 women: T = x^2
for 3 women T= x^3
etc...
The original post said W*2 (i.e. W+W) = T^2. Not mathematically correct if T=W.
#49

mullacllahdoow
has deleted their comment.
#48

racetothebottom
(05/14/2015)
[]
jesus christ you're all missing the point
W is not equal to T
W and T are related, but that doesn't mean they're equal
like please point out where the first comment said W=T
W*x = T^x
is that so difficult to understand?
#50

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Where he said "a woman is trouble" I was literally just making a "funny" (clearly not funny) observation from a mathematical standpoint. I didn't mean to start a debate on the difference between linear and exponential relationships and how to properly define said relationship.
I understood what he was getting at
#52

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
... math wizards are debating my comment
#5
 I don't see what you're trying to say... if W=T and W*2 = T^2 …
[+]
(17 replies)
05/13/2015 on
Happiness
8
#13

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
you failed at math?
you dont simplify it that way
#14

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
T^2 = T * T
if T = W and T^2 = W*2 then
W*2 = T * T at this point it's obvious that W=T=2 but:
Since W = T we can sub T for W on the right hand side giving
W*2 = W*W
divide through by W to get
2 = W as I stated.
#53

anon
(05/15/2015)
[]
Guys, no one said W=T
#19

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
you divided wrong, its ((w*2)/w)=w ,
also
here is a nifty site to do that,
www.wolframalpha.com/
#23

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Also, you might want to check what your own source tells you before you tell me I'm wrong
www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28w*2%29%2Fw
#24

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
well shit.
#22

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
ok, no... W*2/W = 2
W^2/W = W...
a * denotes multiply.
Source. I have a Maths degree. also... my reply was (clearly a bad) attempt at humour. not intended to be analysed.
#51

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
i did not understand thanks for explaining
#25

icewraithking
(05/14/2015)
[]
i swear im getting retarded everyday, i should stop surrounding myself with retarded people
#26

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
no sweat man, maths is my thing, unfair advantage
#38

tolikbro
(05/14/2015)
[]
Set W=T
It just depends on whether you decide to do W*W or W+W.
In the first case, two women = T^2
In the second case, two women = 2T
Trouble squared or twice the trouble, all depends on how you want to combine the women.
#40

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
and W*2 = W+W... what I said was for
W*2 = W^2 that requires W=2 and hence T=2
again, is was supposed to be a joke... but since everyone is so insistant that I'm wrong.
for a relationship for increasing women linearly to result in exponential growth of trouble you'd require:
let T = trouble and let T=x i.e. a large number representing trouble caused by 1 woman. then:
T = x^W
i.e. for 2 women: T = x^2
for 3 women T= x^3
etc...
The original post said W*2 (i.e. W+W) = T^2. Not mathematically correct if T=W.
#49

mullacllahdoow
has deleted their comment.
#48

racetothebottom
(05/14/2015)
[]
jesus christ you're all missing the point
W is not equal to T
W and T are related, but that doesn't mean they're equal
like please point out where the first comment said W=T
W*x = T^x
is that so difficult to understand?
#50

mullacllahdoow
(05/14/2015)
[]
Where he said "a woman is trouble" I was literally just making a "funny" (clearly not funny) observation from a mathematical standpoint. I didn't mean to start a debate on the difference between linear and exponential relationships and how to properly define said relationship.
I understood what he was getting at
#52

athale
(05/14/2015)
[]
... math wizards are debating my comment
#6

athale
(05/13/2015)
[]
im saying one woman is trouble but two woman isn't double trouble its trouble squared
#59
 Right... must be it.
[+]
(1 reply)
05/12/2015 on
500 words per minute
+1
#193

anon
(08/30/2015)
[]
Bc you're all faggot ass bitches.
Cunt.
Prev
First
9
10
11
12
13
20
40
Last
Next
[
585
Total
]
Show Comments (0)