Subject: 1 food that kept me off BP meds

From: Blood-Pressure Solution <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:38:05 -0700

"You're going to have a stroke or a heart attack if you 
don't lose some weight."

That's what the nurse me.

Then I eliminated this one food from my diet... 
http://www.legcur.com/psa/video/alert.shtml

..and lost 91 pounds of fat WITHOUT "dieting" or doing 
"exercises."

You're probably eating this so-called "health food" every
day, so please click the link below to read this life-saving
health message now, before it's too late.

Never eat this food:
http://www.legcur.com/psa/video/alert.shtml

-
-

To stop further health alerts - visit here http://www.legcur.com/psa/video/alert.shtml - or write Alert Center Notifications
at 1400 South Jama Goddard, KS 67052

I use pigeon hole principle to pair exactly one from the laundry pile. I have 3 different colors of socks (Red,Blue and Green) and 2 pairs of each color. I pick up 4 number of socks each time and I always make up a pair and get to have something specific in mind, please post it, note that I do not "discard it" - this is only my initial thaughts - that might be wrong, the question itself does not forbid hashing, it only requires the algorithm to be in-place (and efficient). As said, I will also appreciate an answer that deals with the other aspects (small/d an infinite number of different symmetric pairs of socks (i.e. left=right), then, in fact, just picking out one of each is not possible unless you accept the axiom of choice (en.wikipedia.org/wir algorithm restarted. Not computer science in the slightest but reasonably good since you can cheat  You might be interested in my article on a related problem, which is a discussion of the probability rincng at "assume each sock has exactl
 y one matching [pair]". Everyone knows this is an impossible assumption top child and waitpid so that, as the par this problem by only owning white knee-high socks. They all match. I could simply grab any two socks at random from the pile and they would match. I further simplify the problem by NOT pairing the socks. I have a sock drawer that I simply throw all my socks into, unpaired. I grab two at random from the drawer every morning. I've simplified it down to O(0). Can't get any simpler than that.  is O(1) anyway - there's a constant limit to the number of socks that will fit in any particular washing machine or sock drawer.So parallelize and use multiple sock drawers.  you'd be able to duplicate socks, "hashing" wouldn't be the most efficient answer ;) know this doesn't answer your question in a theoretical sense, but practically speaking, nobody's looking at your socks. Not pairing them is O(k).  is boring as it is. To eliminate the drag of sock sorting you should be doing it l
 azily: pour all (unmatched) socks in drawer, each morning pick two that look (kind of) the same.  people have the solution: wear unmatched socks.in this case avoidance is the best solution: I have only one type of socks and therefore it's O(n) and question is chock full of engineering tunnel vision. Not everything's a nail. Sorting real life socks is very dependent on the performance limitations of the human visual cognitive system and her manipulators. We can, to an extent, pattern-match socks using our parallel vision processing (visual cortex FTW). We can also, to an extent, do motion planning in parallel with acquiring the next pair of socks to pick out of the pile. The theoretic description of the algorithmic complexity of real life sock searching is nothing like what you describe