Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

subzero112001 t1_ja1lue3 wrote

Yes, when you add a positive number to another positive number, your sum will ALWAYS be larger than either addend. That’s basic math.

194

Saelaird t1_ja2i4fy wrote

The absolute state of this sub.

OP should be ashamed. This isn't a shower thought. This is basic math.

93

LittleFairyOfDeath t1_ja4af9x wrote

To be fair they might have just had this revelation. Eureka moments aren’t always groundbreaking to the world

18

hoginlly t1_ja31ty4 wrote

Some people think about basic math in the shower

10

Agile_Coyote_6483 t1_ja3b829 wrote

The point of the sub isnt literally for anything you thought of in the shower...

These people posting hot garbage need to read the community guide

2

hoginlly t1_ja3bho6 wrote

It was a joke. People really take a sub about random thoughts seriously…

5

Agile_Coyote_6483 t1_ja3ciqb wrote

Why are you acting like your comment was attacked, chill out. People are allowed to bring up related things when you make a comment

−11

Old_AP_Pro t1_ja3nwcc wrote

You should take your own advice and chill out.

9

johnnyblaze1999 t1_ja3couy wrote

Same way goes around. You have more ancestors than your ancestors

44

Redditardus t1_ja2o86z wrote

Actually, no. This is only applies if you talk about living descendants, and if you are required to be alive

6

Chaosfox_Firemaker t1_ja3mdde wrote

Anyone that is a descendent of you, is by necessity also a descendent of any one you are a descendent of. a subset.

13

notacanuckskibum t1_ja4s27d wrote

Yes. But that doesn’t make them your ancestors

2

Chaosfox_Firemaker t1_ja4vjsd wrote

??? Which is not what the shower thought is about . I suppose the sentence can be a little ambiguous.

It is impossible to have more descendents than your ancestors (have).

Rephrased, your ancestors always have more descendents than you do.

It's not "it is impossible to have more descendents than you (have) ancestors"

3

zamfire t1_ja2sne2 wrote

Humans have been around approx. 200k years. What if we continue for another 5 billion years? That's a lot more descendants than ancestors.

4

Agile_Coyote_6483 t1_ja3bc7u wrote

Thats not what he meant, but this post was rubbish anyway so i dont blame you for thinking he meant something else

8

LittleFairyOfDeath t1_ja4a951 wrote

I have tried to come up with a witty comeback (ala i will have more living descendants) before i realized that isn’t true either and now i am sad.

4

--Chill t1_ja3jk45 wrote

Except if you're Chuck Norris. All ancestors automatically became his descendants the day he was born.

2

Showerthoughts_Mod t1_ja11vhr wrote

This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.

Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"

(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)

Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.

1

Quiet-Shallot3290 t1_ja4ov76 wrote

All my ancestors are dead, so that don't have jack shit. I also have no descendants. However, I am alive.

1

zanna210 t1_ja5fn7k wrote

Not true It's exactly the opposite. Since the starting point of humanity, u have a large (very large) number of ancestors, but it's finite. If you and your descendants keep reproducing, u can go on for eternity in theory.

1

deepcoma619 t1_ja3f6cp wrote

I don’t know, my Dad is a family of 16 kids. When my grandma passed away in 2005, they did a count of 16kids, 60 Grand Children and another 60 Great-Grandchildren, that’s almost 20years ago, those two generations are about 120 people. My Grandparents descended from pairs of people. That 120 of grand & great-grand is averaging 50 years per person times 120 is 6,000 years totaled up. That’s some lineage either way.

0

GeneralFactotum t1_ja1ne4h wrote

Depend how you count your ancestors. Back in the day when women had huge families historians have realized that not every child was from her husband. (Things happen once in a while you know.) No matter how neatly a family tree is drawn out all of your ancestors may not be on it! You could have come from a much bigger family then the chart shows.

−7

Itsdefiniteltyu t1_ja2oc72 wrote

Yes because men absolutely never have had children out of wedlock that they never acknowledge. Unheard of!

2

GeneralFactotum t1_ja2qp8w wrote

Not sure if serious... since it is usually the women giving birth to the out of wedlock children.

−3

LittleFairyOfDeath t1_ja4akj9 wrote

And every affair partner was married or what? There were unwed women aplenty

1

Helix_dude t1_ja14i1j wrote

It is possible you just have to fuck every opposite gender person earth multiple times

−20