my bags are packed and i'm leaving ann arbor today. i don't know when i'll come back, but likely not until i'm invited for something.
recently i was notified by the U of M computing staff that my account will expire in 2 months. as a step towards becoming a Pitt person (again) [1], my U of M mathematical homepage is now gone. it automatically forwards to my Pitt website ..
.. which is the same HTML code and still looks the same. so as the saying goes,
"la p1us de chan9e,
la p1us de meme ch0se." [2]
speaking of which, yesterday i found a gap in one of my recent arguments. admittedly, i'm not surprised -- it shouldn't have been so easy to prove such a thing -- but nonetheless i'm a little depressed about it.
a failed proof is like a pet goldfish dying;
i feel the same way about it.
well, i guess i can learn from the fallacy that i made, and try to determine what the truth really is. there's time to kill on the bus ride, anyway.
[1] short for `university of pittsburgh.'
also, i was once an undergraduate student there.
[2] i'm too lazy to look up the source, but i think the quote is due to m. pr0ust.
2 comments:
your "de" should be "ca", with cedilla. "plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose". ive seen both "la" and "le" used as articles, although i learned it with "le". the original quotation (bartlett) has neither. check out the source, it may surprise you. :)
interesting. thanks for the correction!
Post a Comment