It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Mathematics Is Wrong. Here's Why.

page: 13
39
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 06:53 PM
sorry if this has been posted already, i havent read everything yet..

what about negative numbers? minus 1 plus 1 = 0, so does minus infinity plus infinity also make 0?

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 06:56 PM

i like you mate, but i can rebute your every answer. ok in this instance under QM the entaglement creates the place holder for the paper your about to hold in the future where a light is shining upon it so you can see it. though destroying the entanglement does not necessarily mean your paper wont exist, entanglement can be mutiple too, just see it that the universe is finite not infinite, a bit like a hard drive, you can delete an entanglement to create room for another, both not exist at the same time as the hard drive space is finite to an extent of reasoning.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 06:57 PM

Originally posted by 2012king
sorry if this has been posted already, i havent read everything yet..

what about negative numbers? minus 1 plus 1 = 0, so does minus infinity plus infinity also make 0?

You can not have a + infinity and a - infinity.

A absolute vacuum is only negative if there are matter/particles within its space.

A absolute vacuum is neutral, neither positive or negative.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:01 PM

hey spy66 i know we been arguing/debating this subject, but lets not add dimensional polarity, it will confuse the F**k outa everyone.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:07 PM

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Knowing this, you know that 0 +(n) = (n). Most people assume that infinity + (n) = infinity, but this is not true. The number (n) is a definition. It exists as something that is definable and it is finite. So the number (n) will arise from infinity in its own existence apparently separate from infinity. So infinity + (n) = (n).

I stopped reading shortly after this paragraph, because this is just jargon.

There is NO logic to this, whatsoever.

Anything plus infinity is infinity.

You are saying that it is just that which is being added to infinity.

That makes no sense.

Anything used to build upon this err in logic would be illogical, so I just stopped reading.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:08 PM

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by 2012king
sorry if this has been posted already, i havent read everything yet..

what about negative numbers? minus 1 plus 1 = 0, so does minus infinity plus infinity also make 0?

You can not have a + infinity and a - infinity.

A absolute vacuum is only negative if there are matter/particles within its space.

A absolute vacuum is neutral, neither positive or negative.

hang on, when did they start using vacuum, matter and particles in mathematics?

there was me thinking fractions were a pain in school

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:13 PM

The entire premise upon which your theory is based upon, in which you attempt to disprove math, is wrong itself. Please complete higher order mathematics for this kind of understanding.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:15 PM

hehe its gets very complicated after school. but yes maths is based upon mass + dimensions + time * dimensions and its cross points to each dimension and its defined mass. hence arriving at infinity, it's the whole time problem, cos it does'nt carry mass, therefore incalculable = infinity

just remove gravity(vacuum) from your thought.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:20 PM
how about if you have 0.9999... and so on. am i right in thinking that there could be an infinite number of 9s after that decimal point, but it can be counted as the number 1 instead?
Surely that is adding something to infinity? (in a way)

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:26 PM

Originally posted by 2012king
sorry if this has been posted already, i havent read everything yet..

what about negative numbers? minus 1 plus 1 = 0, so does minus infinity plus infinity also make 0?

My understanding is if you start with -1 then you +1 you now have +1. 0 does not work as you still need to account for the +1, where did it go?

As far as negatives go where do they come from? They cannot come from 0, it is nothing so you cannot take away from it.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:27 PM
Garbage....I award you no points and we all are dumber after being subjected to such dribble.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:36 PM

Originally posted by technologicalsingularity

i like you mate, but i can rebute your every answer. ok in this instance under QM the entaglement creates the place holder for the paper your about to hold in the future where a light is shining upon it so you can see it. though destroying the entanglement does not necessarily mean your paper wont exist, entanglement can be mutiple too, just see it that the universe is finite not infinite, a bit like a hard drive, you can delete an entanglement to create room for another, both not exist at the same time as the hard drive space is finite to an extent of reasoning.

I am not really sure what you saying here!

QM the entaglement creates the place holder for the paper your about to hold in the future where a light is shining upon it so you can see it. though destroying the entanglement does not necessarily mean your paper wont exist,

I dont know if i can agree to this. But i have a question; can you produce the piece of paper if you destroy the entanglement which holds it?

There is difference in already having the piece of paper under the right circumstances (dimensions), than it is to produce the piece of paper if they are not present.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:51 PM

They taught in school there is no such thing as a perfect absolute vacuum.
I don't think it has changed.

But it seems a lot of things that don't exist are being used in this thread.

Within our world for all practical purposes 0 = 0 , a infinity is a unlimited thing for all practical purposes.
With that being said they could in theory count or give a number for amount of atoms in Universe, rough number give or take a lot of 0s.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:54 PM

the answer is yes, this is only because time is not a single continuous line, imagine a tube like an exhaust pipe, now jam it full of spaggetti until its completely full, the exhaust pipe is the time line(universe), but is dependent on the "H" state of micro time lines inside the exhaust pipe crosshatching, time isnt a straight line, nor a continuous.

future = 1
past = 0
current = H or multiple time lines crosshatching across one another
each length of spaggetti is a dimension, it moves, it slides and bonds.
crosshatching = entanglement (2 time lines bonding via particle entanglement, these entangled particles do not need to be in the same dimension, nor time line)
exhaust pipe = how many entanglements are in this exhaust pipe?

lol

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:01 PM

on this one 0 on its own means jack, but a 0 with an interger preceeding it means to multiply the preceeding interger by 10, 100, 1000 etc....if you had the interger 3 and is preceeded by the non-interger 0 it's value is still 3.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:04 PM

Originally posted by googolplex

They taught in school there is no such thing as a perfect absolute vacuum.
I don't think it has changed.

But it seems a lot of things that don't exist are being used in this thread.

Within our world for all practical purposes 0 = 0 , a infinity is a unlimited thing for all practical purposes.
With that being said they could in theory count or give a number for amount of atoms in Universe, rough number give or take a lot of 0s.

They taught in school there is no such thing as a perfect absolute vacuum.
I don't think it has changed.

I think they thought you that we probably wont able to create a absolute vacuum, Not the same as it dosent exist.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:09 PM

Time is stationary when it comes to the infinite. The infinite cant move and has no reason to move. It is thee constant.

Time is only present in finite energy mass. Here you have a variable of time values depending on what energy mass you are observing and comparing it to.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:24 PM

Originally posted by 2012king
how about if you have 0.9999... and so on. am i right in thinking that there could be an infinite number of 9s after that decimal point, but it can be counted as the number 1 instead?
Surely that is adding something to infinity? (in a way)

This is true. Here's the proof.

Let x = 0.999999999 ...

10x = 9.99999999999 ...
10x - x = 9.99999999 ... - 0.9999999999 ...
9x = 9
x = 1

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:32 PM

your getting warmer spy66, your above statement is semi - right, with the exception that your excluding entanglement, where the time line created by one particle is continued by its entangled particle, the particle that started the time line can be destroyed and not affect the continuation.

an absolute vacuum cannot be determined due to the multi polarization of matter, depending on the near space polarity and its orientation against neighbouring space causes fluctuations in the vacuum, thus never absolute but a calculable differential.

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:32 PM

Originally posted by technologicalsingularity

this is called quantum entanglement, your absolutely right in your thinking. just that the theory of "there and not there simultaniously" is escaping a lot of peeps here.

another reason why zero cannot exist unless in an entangled state which is H.

oh dear 302 would become 32? no multiple use zero to give the outcome value greater than 32, but zero on its own is worthless unless entangled.

edit on 29-8-2011 by technologicalsingularity because: (no reason given)

You might enjoy this: To dive into the quantum realm, the definition of ZERO is the result of reaching maximum entropy. As I said, I am a scientist as well as a researcher. I have to deal with many of the concepts which are discussed here. I find many of the discussions thought provoking and others too sophomoric to consider spending "Time" on, but then the concept of "Time" can start a whole different thread, and in my field which employs "Time" in the equations, interesting anomalies tend to occur.

Food for thought: it is possible to calculate and then observe electrons beginning to move in a circuit before pressure is applied. The only other constant is "time".

39