Pastelland Forum

I noticed (was kinda obvious), but I don't want it to have an ending, fake or not

I don't want it to have an ending, fake or not

everything sometime finds its end... - Reign

(maybe with grammar mistakes, Lol)


-----------------------------
I'll ban the user without warning. I'm looking at you bender. - KeyMaster

(and me. If I will become moderator one day. WUAHHaHHAHAHaha! )

That reminds me your signature.

OnyxIonVortex wrote:

Vurn wrote:The number of all the ancestors is the infinite sum of consecutive, natural powers of two: (2^0)+(2^1)+(2^2)+(2^3)+...

Infinite?

Anyways I see a problem with this simplification, many of the ancestors you count as different are really the same; two ancestors of the 17th or 18th generation that are enough far apart in the tree are already very likely to be siblings. If your reasoning were true, around the 33th generation (log_2 of 7 billion) your ancestors alone would be more than all the people on Earth right now, and that's impossible, so in the long term it fails (in the short term it's a good approximation, though )

Well, duh. It has been calculated that during the course of human history there's been, like, a lot of what we would now call incest. The a-kinship theory is a family made perfect. Its members are pure abstractions.

Incest is between close relatives, if they're enough far apart (for example, following your notation, 6m and 6f have the same parents) it would hardly be called incest.

Hm.. I suppose you're right. But this is the arrangement I'm sticking to.

OnyxIonVortex wrote:Incest is between close relatives, if they're enough far apart (for example, following your notation, 6m and 6f have the same parents) it would hardly be called incest.

Interesting, why not?

Hm.. I suppose you're right. But this is the arrangement I'm sticking to.

Hey, I'm not saying it's not good, you seem to have spent quite a bit of work there

Anteroinen wrote:Interesting, why not?

Well, imagine that two siblings from the same family get married, one with a person from France and the other with a person from Sweden, for example. They have children, grandchildren, etc. and after 500 years one person from each family meet each other by chance, and have a child. Would you call that incest?

And from a biological standpoint, if the generation difference is large enough, their genes would be very diluted when you inherit them, so the effects that in normal incest give rise to congenital birth defects would be almost nonexistent.

Well, so what is the precise technical definition of incest? How many generations removed are we talking about?

OnyxIonVortex wrote:

Anteroinen wrote:Interesting, why not?

Well, imagine that two siblings from the same family get married, one with a person from France and the other with a person from Sweden, for example. They have children, grandchildren, etc. and after 500 years one person from each family meet each other by chance, and have a child. Would you call that incest?

Why would I not call it incest?