How to stop worrying (cute humor)

  • Thread starter Thread starter greatscott
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Humor
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a humorous exploration of how to stop worrying, framed through a mathematical definition and theorem. Participants engage with the concept in a light-hearted manner, reflecting on the implications of the proposed ideas.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Humor-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a formal definition involving sets of humans, actions, and worries, proposing that worrying is linked to the decision-making process.
  • The same participant claims that the only way to stop worrying is to make a conscious decision not to worry, supported by a logical proof.
  • Another participant humorously expresses that the definition makes them worry.
  • A different participant comments that the definition causes confusion, indicating a humorous reaction to the complexity of the argument.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; while some engage with the mathematical framing humorously, others express confusion or concern about the definition presented.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes humorous interpretations and reactions to a mathematical approach to a psychological concept, highlighting varying levels of understanding and engagement with the formalism.

greatscott
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I have just discovered how to stop worrying! Here it goes (Unicode):

Definition.
Let H be the set of all humans, A the set of all actions, and W ⊂A be the set of all worries. A person p ∈ H is said to be worrying if and only if p's set of choices C = {f(p)} (where f(p) ∈ A) either has more than one elements or has precisely one element c ∈ W.​
Theorem.
The only way to stop worrying is to decide to do so.​
Proof.
If a person p ∈ H makes a decision not to worry, which we denote as n ∉ W, rather than to worry, which we denote as w, then C = {f(p)} = {n} which has only one element. If p decides to worry, p is certainly worrying since C = {w} where w ∈ W. Now, if p does not decide whether to worry or not, p's set of choices has at least two elements, namely C = {n, w, ...}. Therefore, the only way to stop worrying is to decide not to worry. ∎
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
greatscott said:
I have just discovered how to stop worrying! Here it goes (Unicode):

Definition.
Let H be the set of all humans, A the set of all actions, and W ⊂A be the set of all worries. A person p ∈ H is said to be worrying if and only if p's set of choices C = {f(p)} (where f(p) ∈ A) either has more than one elements or has precisely one element c ∈ W.​
Theorem.
The only way to stop worrying is to decide to do so.​
Proof.
If a person p ∈ H makes a decision not to worry, which we denote as n ∉ W, rather than to worry, which we denote as w, then C = {f(p)} = {n} which has only one element. If p decides to worry, p is certainly worrying since C = {w} where w ∈ W. Now, if p does not decide whether to worry or not, p's set of choices has at least two elements, namely C = {n, w, ...}. Therefore, the only way to stop worrying is to decide not to worry. ∎

"Don't worry...be happy", so said the wise and (for a while) ubiquitous fish-on-the-wall.
 
that "definition" makes me worry
 
that definition makes my head hurt lol
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
11K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K