you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Canbot 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

First, we live in the new dark age. All valuable knowledge is dumbed down, inverted, or subverted in some way. There are many reasons, but trying to prove one or the other is counter productive because you can't definitively prove motivation, which just opens the door for attacks by proxy on everything you believe.

With regards to maths students there are several big hurdles I have experienced that make them closed minded to any such criticism of their craft. Besides of course the arrogance and appeals to authority.

One of the major cult like beliefs they hold is that math can teach us things about reality that are not only contradictory to our own expectations but beyond our ability to study or prove in any other way.

For example: If an equation shows that time can move in both directions then it must be true even though it contradicts all our experiments and experience. To them it is still a fact and everything else is wrong. It is only a matter of inventing an explanation, such as "we just don't know how to time travel yet."

With logic like that it becomes impossible to reason with them because math is God and no matter how wrong, contradictory, illogical or disprovable it is none of it matters. All you need to do is invent an excuse, without evidence or experiment, no matter how convoluted the excuse it must be true.

A better example of that is infinitesimals and infinities. A lot of the crazier claims purported to be "proven" with math arise from these. Such as 2.9 + 2.9 =5.

But neither infinities or infinitesimals can exist in reality.

Math was invented to describe reality. As it became more advanced it became easy for people to believe that it is more than a tool invented by man. They began believing it is a discoverable, all permeable, infallible, all knowing fabric that underlies reality. A God. They worship it, never question it, and would never have an open debate with a filthy heretic. Only their clergy (PhDs) are allowed to espous on its nature.

[–]Masterblaster 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Excellent comment. I think the perfect example of this is “Dark Matter.” Somehow it’s easier for people to believe that the majority of all matter exists in some unknown form than it is to question the validity of the theory.

[–]NuclearBadger 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

That reminds me of infinity x infinity = infinity squared.

How can you square a number that has no end?

Absolute bollocks.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Or the equally retarded "some infinities are bigger than others". And if you point out that this is illogical they claim you just aren't intelligent enough to understand it.

[–]Mazurro 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Cardinality of infinite sets is a thing, this claim is just simplified for retards

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

No it's not. It is simplified by retards. No one has any problem understanding "it has more components." But apparently some people don't understand the concept that nothing can be bigger than infinity.

[–]platonic1[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Some infinites have to be bigger because infinities are not quantities. It is easy to understand that some functions grow faster than others as input grows. The function that grows faster becomes an infinite to a higher order, even though they both approach infinite, which just means it grows faster as the input size increases

If you can’t understand that try to imagine and endless waterfall and an endless bucket. There is finite matter in the universe but that has nothing to do with the illustration. If you compare the water poured out at a moment in two identical empty basins, the volume of water under the waterfall will be greater. Or if the basin under the waterfall has a tanker full of water in the beginning, it will be greater. But if you look some time later, you will notice that the basin under the waterfall increased in volume more than the basin under the bucket. Therefore the waterfall increases the volume faster than the bucket, and the more time we give it the more volume it will add. It will be an infinite of a higher, because infinite is not a fixed quantity.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Here we go with the "if you don't buy what I'm selling it's because you don't understand" shit.

Infinite is literally the opposite of finite. If you need a word for a number that perpetually grows then invent a name for it. You don't get to claim that infinity means something other than the opposite of finite just because you painted yourself into a corner.

Secondly, if I count by 10s my number grows faster than if I count by fractions. But fractions have more components. The latter grows slower because it has more cardinality. Yet another contradiction in your convoluted religion that pretends to be math but never corrects any of the mistakes that have accumulated from centuries of arrogant blowhards playing a game of "yes and". Perpetually trying to invent the next thing without disturbing the house of cards that is the tower of everyone else's "next thing" upon which you all perch.

Modern math is the epitome of pseudo intellectualism.

[–]JoGooD 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Mathematic is just a model to describe the physical world. It is quite accurate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-I6XTVZXww

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If there is one thing string theory isn't it's a description of the physical world. It has failed to ever create a prediction or testable explanation of anything.

Your link does not support your claim at all.

What they did is not really math. You can't cut out a portion of an equation and claim it is the result of the whole. That's just not math.

[–]JoGooD 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The video doesn't explain why this is useful, it just show that infinite isn't something well understood. These are valid math equation.

[–]NuclearBadger 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You mean like infinity+1 lol