Become a part of the TranceAddict community! Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > Political Chillout Thread
Pages (590): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 [255] 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
DrUg_Tit0
e^(i*pi)+1=0



Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

quote:
Originally posted by trancaholic
Well, it's pretty much what I do for a living, and I guess I could mock up something non-fancy in Java in a couple of hours. It might even be fun. However, I would need to have the setup specified in much more detail:
- What is the probability of an offspring of two extra digit-individuals being an extra digit-individual itself?


Well..Since the gene is dominant, the probability varies. If they're 65 and 65, it's 75%. If they're 66 and 65, it's 100%, and so is if they're 66 and 66. Additionally, if they're 66 and 55, it's a 100%, 65 and 55 have a 50% chance, while 55 and 55 have a 0%. However this makes it even more complicated since you'd also have to keep track of the recessive genes. If there's just 1000 people starting, I suppose you can say that each of the 2 6-fingered people has just one gene. But on larger populations, I'd say that it's best to say that 1/3 of them have a 66 and 2/3 have a 65.

quote:
- The reproduction selection mechanims is pretty unclear to me. If "the average couple" have two kids, then everyone will have to reproduce to keep the population growth from going negative (and hence answering the overall question trivially by having any such population go extinct). Additionally, it would mean that no natural selection is taking place this way.


Well, if it's just the average couple that manages to raise 2 kids, I'd say it just means that the population is neither growing nor declining. Some might have more and some less. My guess is that on average, 6-fingered people have 10% more. Now there's another problem here I'd say. If there would be 50% of the 6 fingered ppl in the population, then to maintain population equilibrium they'd have to have about 2.0952 children per couple, while 5-fingered ones would have some 1.9046 children. Mixed couples would then I suppose have 2 children exactly. But the thing is, if there's, say 10% of 6 fingered people in a group, the numbers are different, because he's closer to 2.1 children, while the rest is closer to 2.0. Ultimately, when 6 fingered people prevail, they'll have 2.0 children while the last 5 fingered couples will have about 1.81. So that's kinda one more dynamic parametar here.

quote:
Moreover, what does it mean for an individual to be "10% more likely to survive"? Does "survive" substitute for "procreate" here? And are individuals allowed to survive from one generation to the next (i.e. the same individual can compete for procreation "slots" in more than one generation)? Are individuals allowed to participate in more than one offspring generating couple in the same generation?


I don't really think the author actually thought about all these aspects, so we should make it as simple as possible. Survive does seem to substitute for procreate, and I think we should just have them be absolutely monogamous and living equal lifespans. I don't think changing that would make a big difference, aside from making the problem even more complicated.

quote:
And does "10% more" hint at "80% rather than 70% chance of surviving" or "77% rather than 70% chance of surviving".
Depending on how all these questions are answered the results may vary significantly.


I'd say just substitute survive for procreate. If they all didn't have a 100% survival rate, with just 2 children per couple they'd die out pretty soon. So my guess is that the author wanted to say procreate.

Now if you actually go and do this, I'd really like to see how you did it


___________________
1+1=10

Old Post May-28-2006 19:07  Croatia
Click Here to See the Profile for DrUg_Tit0 Click Here to Email DrUg_Tit0 Click here to Send DrUg_Tit0 a Private Message Add DrUg_Tit0 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
trancaholic
Danish Prophet of Doom



Registered: Oct 2000
Location: Aalborg

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Well..Since the gene is dominant, the probability varies. If they're 65 and 65, it's 75%. If they're 66 and 65, it's 100%, and so is if they're 66 and 66. Additionally, if they're 66 and 55, it's a 100%, 65 and 55 have a 50% chance, while 55 and 55 have a 0%.

To cut it short, what I need would be the following probabilities (P(56|65,66) means "if a 65 parent and 66 parent gets a kid, then the probability of that kid being a 56 is P(56|65,66)"):

P(66|66,66)
P(65|66,66)
P(56|66,66)

P(66|66,65)
P(65|66,65)
P(56|66,65)

P(66|66,56)
P(65|66,56)
P(56|66,56)

P(66|66,55)
P(65|66,55)
P(56|66,55)

P(66|65,65)
P(65|65,65)
P(56|65,65)

P(66|65,56)
P(65|65,56)
P(56|65,56)

P(66|65,55)
P(65|65,55)
P(56|65,55)

P(66|56,56)
P(65|56,56)
P(56|56,56)

P(66|56,55)
P(65|56,55)
P(56|56,55)

P(66|55,55)
P(65|55,55)
P(56|55,55)

The last three should sum to 0.002, according to the requirement that one out of 500 kids born to normal parents would have the gene anomaly.

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
However this makes it even more complicated since you'd also have to keep track of the recessive genes. If there's just 1000 people starting, I suppose you can say that each of the 2 6-fingered people has just one gene. But on larger populations, I'd say that it's best to say that 1/3 of them have a 66 and 2/3 have a 65.

I don't follow you here. Which gene is it that you see as recessive? Would it be somehow captured by the detailed list of probabilities listed above?

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Well, if it's just the average couple that manages to raise 2 kids, I'd say it just means that the population is neither growing nor declining. Some might have more and some less. My guess is that on average, 6-fingered people have 10% more.

This I also something I don't understand. When you say that 6-fingered people have 10% more kids, do you then mean than each member of *the entire group* of 6-fingered people on the average have 10% more kids than people with five fingers? I could agree with that.

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Now there's another problem here I'd say. If there would be 50% of the 6 fingered ppl in the population, then to maintain population equilibrium they'd have to have about 2.0952 children per couple, while 5-fingered ones would have some 1.9046 children. Mixed couples would then I suppose have 2 children exactly. But the thing is, if there's, say 10% of 6 fingered people in a group, the numbers are different, because he's closer to 2.1 children, while the rest is closer to 2.0. Ultimately, when 6 fingered people prevail, they'll have 2.0 children while the last 5 fingered couples will have about 1.81. So that's kinda one more dynamic parametar here.

Well, the entire thing seems highly unrealistic if everyone procreates. And it definitely clashes with the intuition of 6-digit individuals somehow having an advantage in getting to the mating stage. I would think of the reproduction mechanism in the following manner:

while (not enough new individuals to constitute a generation)
- sample two individuals from the old population, that has not already been sampled. Each individual with 6-digits on at least one hand has a 10% higher chance of being picked than someone with only 5 digits.
- generate x new individuals from these sampled individuals (the children of the couple)

Come to think of it, maybe the 10% doesn't hold for an 66-individual?

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
I don't really think the author actually thought about all these aspects, so we should make it as simple as possible. Survive does seem to substitute for procreate, and I think we should just have them be absolutely monogamous and living equal lifespans. I don't think changing that would make a big difference, aside from making the problem even more complicated. I'd say just substitute survive for procreate. If they all didn't have a 100% survival rate, with just 2 children per couple they'd die out pretty soon. So my guess is that the author wanted to say procreate.

I agree here. Also having equal lifetimes is a must if the question about "how many generations" is to make any sense.

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Now if you actually go and do this, I'd really like to see how you did it

It won't be very deep - and I have a bad habit of not commenting my code, but of course I can post it (if I get the probabilities, that is).

Old Post May-29-2006 07:30  Denmark
Click Here to See the Profile for trancaholic Click here to Send trancaholic a Private Message Add trancaholic to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
DrUg_Tit0
e^(i*pi)+1=0



Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

quote:
Originally posted by trancaholic
To cut it short, what I need would be the following probabilities (P(56|65,66) means "if a 65 parent and 66 parent gets a kid, then the probability of that kid being a 56 is P(56|65,66)"):

P(66|66,66)
P(65|66,66)
P(56|66,66)

P(66|66,65)
P(65|66,65)
P(56|66,65)

P(66|66,56)
P(65|66,56)
P(56|66,56)

P(66|66,55)
P(65|66,55)
P(56|66,55)

P(66|65,65)
P(65|65,65)
P(56|65,65)

P(66|65,56)
P(65|65,56)
P(56|65,56)

P(66|65,55)
P(65|65,55)
P(56|65,55)

P(66|56,56)
P(65|56,56)
P(56|56,56)

P(66|56,55)
P(65|56,55)
P(56|56,55)

P(66|55,55)
P(65|55,55)
P(56|55,55)

The last three should sum to 0.002, according to the requirement that one out of 500 kids born to normal parents would have the gene anomaly.


Um, no I don't think it should work that way. You just start with 0.2% of people already having 6 fingers, and go on from there. Having 5 fingered people have a 2% chance of evolving a 6 fingered gene would necessitate having 6 fingered people with a chance of evolving a 5 fingered gene. So the last 3 should sum up to 0.

quote:
I don't follow you here. Which gene is it that you see as recessive? Would it be somehow captured by the detailed list of probabilities listed above?


I think the question said that 5 fingered gene is recessive. Lots of the possibilities you mentioned above are impossible. Mostly the ones where 55+55 give a 6 fingered child, or where xx+66 make a 5 fingered child.


quote:
This I also something I don't understand. When you say that 6-fingered people have 10% more kids, do you then mean than each member of *the entire group* of 6-fingered people on the average have 10% more kids than people with five fingers? I could agree with that.


Yes, on average the 6 fingered group has 10% more children than the 5 fingered group. I suppose mixed couples have it half-way in between.

quote:
Well, the entire thing seems highly unrealistic if everyone procreates. And it definitely clashes with the intuition of 6-digit individuals somehow having an advantage in getting to the mating stage.[quote]

As long as the procreation average of a group is the same, it doesn't matter if every individual has 2 kids, or if one individual has 4 kids while another one has none.

[quote] I would think of the reproduction mechanism in the following manner:

while (not enough new individuals to constitute a generation)
- sample two individuals from the old population, that has not already been sampled. Each individual with 6-digits on at least one hand has a 10% higher chance of being picked than someone with only 5 digits.
- generate x new individuals from these sampled individuals (the children of the couple)


Hm..I suppose a 65 or a 56 individual will have 6 fingers on both hands, that there won't be ones with 6 fingers on just one hand only. I suppose picking chance is more realistic than just arbitrarily saying they have 10% more children, and that may be what the author actually meant. I was thinking of giving them all a same chance and just having 6 fingered ones 10% more kids. But I suppose it shouldn't matter much in the end.

quote:
Come to think of it, maybe the 10% doesn't hold for an 66-individual?


It should, since he's externally no different than a 5 fingered person.

quote:
It won't be very deep - and I have a bad habit of not commenting my code, but of course I can post it (if I get the probabilities, that is).


Yeah..well at least you have some idea about it..Although I might start working on it too now, I'm kinda getting intrigued..


___________________
1+1=10

Old Post May-30-2006 01:09  Croatia
Click Here to See the Profile for DrUg_Tit0 Click Here to Email DrUg_Tit0 Click here to Send DrUg_Tit0 a Private Message Add DrUg_Tit0 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

So I'm really curious as to what the hell time is. Does it even exist? I'm not very well read in this area of physics. Are there any books or something you guys could recommend that could provide some insight? I'm guessing Drug_Tito, trancaholic, and Renegade have probably read plently of material related to this subject. So if you guys could direct me to something that would help, that would be much appreciated.


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post May-30-2006 06:01  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

So here's some stuff from wiki:

quote:

Many ancient philosophers wrote lengthy essays on time, believing it to be the essence around which life was based. A famous analogy was one comparing the time of life to the passing of sand through an hourglass. The sand at the top is the future, and, one tiny grain at a time, the future flows through the present into the past. The past ever expanding, the future ever decreasing, but the future grains being moulded into the past through the present. This was widely discussed in around the 3rd century CE.

.....

Newton believed time and space form a container for events, which is as real as the objects it contains. In contrast, Leibniz believed that time and space are a conceptual apparatus describing the interrelations between events. These differences came to a head in the famous Leibniz-Clark Correspondence.

Leibniz and others thought of time as a fundamental part of an abstract conceptual framework, together with space and number, within which we sequence events, quantify their duration, and compare the motions of objects. In this view, time does not refer to any kind of entity that "flows," that objects "move through," or that is a "container" for events.


I tend to lean towards Leibniz's understanding of time. Ofcourse, this still doesn't satisfy my curiousity. There also seems to be great disagreemnt amongst scientists and philosophers alike on what time is...

bah...

I guess I'll wait for a response from one of you guys before I post more stuff.


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post May-30-2006 06:22  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Psy-T
Oblique memories



Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Haifa

quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
So I'm really curious as to what the hell time is. Does it even exist? I'm not very well read in this area of physics. Are there any books or something you guys could recommend that could provide some insight? I'm guessing Drug_Tito, trancaholic, and Renegade have probably read plently of material related to this subject. So if you guys could direct me to something that would help, that would be much appreciated.


time Audio pronunciation of "time" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tm)
n.

1.
1. A nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.
2. An interval separating two points on this continuum; a duration: a long time since the last war; passed the time reading.
3. A number, as of years, days, or minutes, representing such an interval: ran the course in a time just under four minutes.
4. A similar number representing a specific point on this continuum, reckoned in hours and minutes: checked her watch and recorded the time, 6:17 A.M.
5. A system by which such intervals are measured or such numbers are reckoned: solar time.

what's unsatisfactory about this definition to you?


what could the thing we refer to as "time" be, if not time? what are our clocks measuring?

another approach, hopefully you know some basics about music production for this one:

you have a track playing a pattern at 120bpm (beats per minute), the pattern has only one short note on it's first step (in it's begining), and it cycles every 16 steps. what happens between the soundings of the note? what separates them? is it three dimensional space?


___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

Old Post May-30-2006 07:41  Israel
Click Here to See the Profile for Psy-T Click Here to Email Psy-T Click here to Send Psy-T a Private Message Visit Psy-T's homepage! Add Psy-T to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

^^ I think you misunderstood my question. Is time even real or is it a function of our mind that shapes our perception of the universe? I don't know if I expressed it really well just here so let me know if you need some clarification .


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post May-30-2006 08:01  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Psy-T
Oblique memories



Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Haifa

quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
^^ I think you misunderstood my question. Is time even real or is it a function of our mind that shapes our perception of the universe? I don't know if I expressed it really well just here so let me know if you need some clarification .


define "real".


___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

Old Post May-30-2006 08:06  Israel
Click Here to See the Profile for Psy-T Click Here to Email Psy-T Click here to Send Psy-T a Private Message Visit Psy-T's homepage! Add Psy-T to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

Oh boy, somehow I expected your philosophical ass to say something like that . Well, real in the sense that the existence of it is independent of how our brain functions.

But that was only one aspect to my question. I'm also interested in having a better understanding of what it is (and by that I don't mean a dictionary definition or a mechanics text book definition).


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post May-30-2006 08:26  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Dervish
Your opinion matters.



Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Wick, Scotland

I remember something about it gravity being the curve of space-time.... hmm is time not actaully another part of space. Like spacetime basicly? Just another (invisable to us) dimention?

Old Post May-30-2006 08:46 
Click Here to See the Profile for Dervish Click here to Send Dervish a Private Message Add Dervish to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Psy-T
Oblique memories



Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Haifa

quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Oh boy, somehow I expected your philosophical ass to say something like that . Well, real in the sense that the existence of it is independent of how our brain functions.


cogito ergo sum can only lead us so far...
in other words.. name one thing which is definitely independent of our brain functions and explain how it is independent.

quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
But that was only one aspect to my question. I'm also interested in having a better understanding of what it is (and by that I don't mean a dictionary definition or a mechanics text book definition).


while we're rejecting time, why not reject space aswell? it conforms to the same definition...


___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

Old Post May-30-2006 09:02  Israel
Click Here to See the Profile for Psy-T Click Here to Email Psy-T Click here to Send Psy-T a Private Message Visit Psy-T's homepage! Add Psy-T to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Psy-T
Oblique memories



Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Haifa

quote:
Originally posted by Dervish
I remember something about it gravity being the curve of space-time.... hmm is time not actaully another part of space. Like spacetime basicly? Just another (invisable to us) dimention?


with time being A nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future, and continuum being A continuous extent, succession, or whole, no part of which can be distinguished from neighboring parts except by arbitrary division... space doesn't seem that far off...


___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

Old Post May-30-2006 09:08  Israel
Click Here to See the Profile for Psy-T Click Here to Email Psy-T Click here to Send Psy-T a Private Message Visit Psy-T's homepage! Add Psy-T to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > Political Chillout Thread
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (590): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 [255] 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 »  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread

Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 23:05.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2014

Privacy Statement
Geo Visitors Map

Icon