It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

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

 

Mathematics Is Wrong. Here's Why.

page: 15
39
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by technologicalsingularity
reply to post by spy66
 


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.



I am not just getting warmer, i have been right all along.

Can you have 2 electrons/particles in a space that is not 3 dimensions?

No.

You can't even have 1 electron/particle without it being within a 3 dimensional space.

The electron has a "mass" that differs from its surrounding "larger" space. It even has a spin.
to be able to determine and observe any of this you need a 3 dimensional background.





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.


True, because we have no way of observing anything that is out side the finite existence.

But the vacuum existed before the particles as infinite space/dimension.





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

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




posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   
0 is a number, but infinity is not a number. Infinite is a process.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
0 is a number, but infinity is not a number. Infinite is a process.


The infinite is not a process. It is stationary. Finite is a process, it has momentum.

But you are right about 0. It is just a number.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by 547000
0 is a number, but infinity is not a number. Infinite is a process.


The infinite is not a process. It is stationary. Finite is a process, it has momentum.

But you are right about 0. It is just a number.


In mathematics it is a process. It means that something increases without bound.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by 547000

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by 547000
0 is a number, but infinity is not a number. Infinite is a process.


The infinite is not a process. It is stationary. Finite is a process, it has momentum.

But you are right about 0. It is just a number.


In mathematics it is a process. It means that something increases without bound.


Ok. But physically the infinite can't expand. What dimension would it expand within?



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Infinite is not a number though. If you are talking in a dimensional sense, infinite just goes on forever and ever. Infinite is not the biggest number you can think of, infinity has no bound.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 05:06 AM
link   
The holographic principle sprang to mind whilst reading the OP, wherein infinity is an underlying dimension from which value is projected.

In this case, anything removed is just no longer projected from the infinite backdrop and 0 would be akin to nothing being projected.

Well, that was the picture painted in my mind anyhow. Nice thread, loads of interesting replies that i'm gonna get back to reading.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   
someone posted a reply saying that infinity's has been rigorously tested in maths, this is true to a certain extent, but really your looking at big equations to only calculate approximation, an example:

you have a very tall and wide tree in the middle of summer, as you look up you observe millions of leaves, how do you calculate the number of leaves on the tree?

1. work out the approx area
2. split the area by vertical fibonacci divisions
3. now split that area by horizontal fib divisions
4. count how many branches in that area, then count how many leaves are on a branch
5. now work backwards using the fib levels, multiplying
6. you now have an approximate guess of how many leaves are on the tree, but not the exact number of leaves.

this generally proves just how way off many calculations can be when using methods of analysis, in other words this still doesnt give infinity a defined value and only an approximation, the accuracy of the approximation is holy dependent on resolution.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by technologicalsingularity
 


Give me any value for infinity and I'll give you a bigger number. Infinity has no value. It is not a quantity.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
I always enjoyed math and was always fascinated by the difficult to comprhend parts...like infinity.

My knowledge is too little to join in-depth technical discussions in the matter but I have the notion that the subject of infinity is more a philosofical debate than a mathematical debate.

I remember that there was this guy somewhere at the end of the 19th century who got caught by the subject and ended in up at the funny-farm. For some people it is better to skip certain problems and to move on.

There are some quotes about mathematical problems which can be applied when extreemly difficult problems need to be solved....like

According to my calculations, this problem doesn't exist..or

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality...Albert E

All over China, parents tell their children to stop complaining and to finish their quadratic equations and trigonometric functions because there are sixty-five million American kids going to bed with no math at all." — Michael Cunningham

The whole is more than the sum of the parts." — Aristotle

"Round numbers are always false." — Samuel Johnson (1709-84), British lexicographer

A sine curve goes off to infinity, or at least the end of the blackboard

There are 3 kinds of people: those who can count and those who can't


And than there is this one......What you cannot measure doesn't exist...!!!

Good luck with your thread...!!


edit on 30/8/2011 by zatara because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


There is one major thing you have forgotten to think about in you other post concerning dimensions.

And that is:
-You can not have 1 dimension without having the third dimension to house it. Without the third dimension to house the 1 dimension. 1 dimension would have to be infinite. Ant it would have to be a infinite third dimensional space.

-You can not have two dimensions without having the third dimension to house them.



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


I didn't forget to think about this it just wasn't put into your words. There isn't anything wrong with the way I worded it.



-Alien



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


I can measure zero,

How much money do I have in my pocket 0.

See measured none, zero, zip, nada.

So zero does have a value greater then -1 and less then 1.

I owe my creditors, so I have negative amounts of money, yet I have 0 in my pocket, once I have money in my pocket I will have a positive amount until my creditors realize I have money and they will take it all until I have 0 and will leave me with a negative balance because they never seem to get enough.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


It is impossible for you to have negative amount of dollars in your wallet. Show me your "negative dollars".


-Alien



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


It is impossible for you to have negative amount of dollars in your wallet. Show me your "negative dollars".


-Alien


It's called a credit card.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


The bill from the water company, electric company, bank note on the home.

All show negative on the work sheet.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Smack
 


My first laugh of the day thanks Smack.

Back on topic:

I agree with the OP that 0 can be replaced with (infinity). But, I have one question for the OP. Can you show me ware using this new method would be significant? Not that I doubt that you would yield different results.

-Alien



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


And I can show you that I have a billion dollars by writing it down on a piece of paper..........

Can you physically show me your negative dollars? No. Are being serious or are you joking?

-Alien



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
If I'm in a car travelling at 60km per hour and I slow down to a stand still, I'm travelling at 0km per hour, not and infinite number of km per hour.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


No you are just standing still and have the potential to move X km p/h


-Alien



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by john_bmth
 


No you are just standing still and have the potential to move X km p/h


-Alien

I'd be travelling at 0km per hour. I have the potential to move to Xkm per hour at any speed I'm travelling, that doesn't mean I'm actually travelling at that speed. 0 is not equal to infinity.
edit on 30-8-2011 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join