• Oct 29th 2012, 10:59 PM
beezmap
I am 27 years old and you.......?
• Oct 30th 2012, 12:38 AM
MarkFL
17,917 days old.
• Oct 30th 2012, 03:16 AM
Ashir
Nearing fifty^
13.
• Nov 1st 2012, 11:13 PM
albertjhon
I am 28 years old...
• Nov 3rd 2012, 06:10 PM
GKC
21
• Nov 3rd 2012, 07:58 PM
TheEmptySet
$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}\lim_{n \to \infty}\sum_{k=0}^{\lfloor n \rfloor}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^k}{k!}(\sqrt{\pi}t^{k+4}+18t^{2k})dt$
• Nov 3rd 2012, 10:11 PM
GKC
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheEmptySet
$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}\lim_{n \to \infty}\sum_{k=0}^{\lfloor n \rfloor}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^k}{k!}(\sqrt{\pi}t^{k+4}+18t^{2k})dt$

Ahh I see you are roughly.....complicated years old. Very. Nice lol
• Nov 18th 2012, 09:08 AM
jion
Hello.
I am 23 years old
math is the minded game.
• Nov 18th 2012, 09:15 AM
topsquark
I'm not sure how to answer this question. Are you talking about my age as a corporeal body or the age of the atoms that "build" me. Then we have the problem that the quarks that make up these particles don't really have an age as such. Not to mention that we all have trace amounts of radioactive materials in our systems that constantly decay. And if I run by you then I'm in a different reference frame, so our ages are undetermined if we haven't kept track of that. And finally there really is no way to tell for sure because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Otherwise 42 is a good estimate.

-Dan

(Kriz you are the master! (Bow) )
• Nov 18th 2012, 12:43 PM
Chipset3600