# I think I might know a thing or two about computer networks other than Algabreic geometry...

#### Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

If I think I might know a thing or two about computer networks other
than Algebraic geometry and (and I do), and I have read the only way
to prove I know a thing or two about computer networks other than
Algebraic geometry is to resurrect Gauss, what are the practical next
steps to proving (or in this case) checking if I indeed do know a
thing or two about computer networks other than Algebraic geometry?
You see I am unsure if I indeed do know a thing or two about computer
networks other than Algebraic geometry but I think I do. In fact I am
certain I do know two things about them in one sense. 1) They involve
computers. 2) They involve networks. But besides this here is what is
troubling me: How does one check a condition when the definition is
uncertain? You see I am certain I know a thing or two about computer
networks other than Algebraic geometry but I am uncertain the terms
mean the same things to you as they do to me. You see to me it does
not matter what order they appear as long as they appear and have
appeared. It is like the machine on quantum level processes the
information as a whole the second it appears but then the software
construct above proceeds slowly along a linear path. Further, how am I
to prove a condition with an in it being an uncertain condition. For
example, if I am certain I know a thing or two about computer networks
other than Algebraic geometry but I am uncertain I but think I know a
thing or two about computer networks other than Algebraic geometry as
the term is used under a potential different definition, how do I
check your definition against mine? This seems extremely difficult
because I am told the only way to check if I know a thing or two about
computer networks other than Algebraic is to prove it by having
resurrected Gauss.