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: 20
39
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:49 AM

I agree with you. What really annoys me is people are quick to denounce mathematics yet I don't see them creating their own mathematics. I suggest people define what they want 0 and infinity to be then derive their own math. See how far they get.

eg: I can define the number 1 to be something such that any real number n * 1 = 55. I wouldn't do that but I can.
I will call 1 the "stupidity element of multiplication" in my mathematics. No idea what 2,3,4, ... would be but. Anyways.
edit on 1-9-2011 by PaulMcCartney because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:57 AM

That's what gets me. If you define infinite and zero to be the same thing you will very quickly realize why the system fails. This "tolerate everything under the sun" post-modernist phase of society denies the idea that absolute truth exists or is self consistent or at the very least logical.

Most people suppose that mathematics is an abstract game, but in reality it has very concrete roots and maybe a history of it would show it.
edit on 1-9-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:59 AM

Originally posted by spy66

If a vacuum contain particles the vacuum would not change, it would still be a absolute vacuum with particles.

It may still be a vacuum but it would not be an absolute vacuum. An absolute vacuum, by definition, would contain zero particles, hence absolute.

You have a absolute vacuum with particles.That is not impossible. We can create a vacuum with less particles cant we?

No, you don't. Or at least you wouldn't were it possible, which it isn't. As long as a single particle remains it isn't absolute.

Its just that we can not create a absolute vacuum, because we dont have the energy/force to create it. No even with all the particles in existence could we use them to create a absolute vacuum.

And if we could create such a vacuum it would contain zero particles and be an absolute vacuum.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:10 AM

Agree. Mathematics didn't come from nowhere.
Humans understood the idea of unity, 1, and counting numbers which led to necessary other number systems, negatives, real, concept of zero, dare i say infinity(which isn't a number). It's a logical progression that has yielded time and time again meaningful results.

I do love that AxB /= BxA in linear algebra. I love mathematics. But there the multiplication operator takes on a different meaning. (and no it's not wrong, it was defined that way)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:12 AM

You're both stuck in the Classical world. If you want to legitimately discuss the "zero" nature of the vacuum, then first look-up "Quantum vacuum". I think you'll find that the true, quantum nature of the vacuum precludes your debate on whether or not a vacuum is truly "zero" and whether or not it is still a vacuum if it contains particles.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:23 AM

Originally posted by PaulMcCartney

Agree. Mathematics didn't come from nowhere.
Humans understood the idea of unity, 1, and counting numbers which led to necessary other number systems, negatives, real, concept of zero, dare i say infinity(which isn't a number). It's a logical progression that has yielded time and time again meaningful results.

I do love that AxB /= BxA in linear algebra. I love mathematics. But there the multiplication operator takes on a different meaning. (and no it's not wrong, it was defined that way)

I love mathematics. But it sometimes takes much practice and effort to appreciate its logical purity and precision. I didn't like math in high school, but it wasn't till recently that I understood what it was about.

Anyway, I'm leaving this thread to allow for people to use illogical arguments as a reason for why "math is wrong". I'm sorry LiberalSkeptic that I got annoyed at you. I shouldn't have snapped like that. So, have at it guys.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:29 AM

Originally posted by 547000

*sigh*

The arguments given in this topic are not logical, it's just a lot of sophistry and begging the question. A modicum of knowledge on the given subject matter would show this. You can't even argue that zero and infinity are the same things since they aren't even the same object or inherit the same properties. If they were our physicals laws would not function at all.

But you know what, you don't even exist, I am all that exists in this universe, and you, my play things, will cease to be. I hope you accept solipsism as equally valid too, my imaginary friend.

edit on 1-9-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

*sigh*?
Is it that irritant? *naah* come here you, and I will give you some cookies and a glass of warm milk

I do not mean to make your evening this unpleasant with my ramblings

I totally accept solipsism. Why not I say.
Perhaps I, my mind and my thoughts are just a projection of your mind in your universe.
Really, the only thing one can be sure about is ones own thoughts. If even that...
Do I know anything about my life or my surroundings in this existence. It could be anything. The only thing that is telling me how things are, is my brain. Its just a tiny "filter", really, a nothingness trying to decode the sensory inputs around in this vast soup of energy, matter, antimatter and information.
Why would it even come close to comprehend how things really are.
But yea as you said i am just the imagination of your brain.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:40 AM

Originally posted by 547000

Originally posted by PaulMcCartney

Agree. Mathematics didn't come from nowhere.
Humans understood the idea of unity, 1, and counting numbers which led to necessary other number systems, negatives, real, concept of zero, dare i say infinity(which isn't a number). It's a logical progression that has yielded time and time again meaningful results.

I do love that AxB /= BxA in linear algebra. I love mathematics. But there the multiplication operator takes on a different meaning. (and no it's not wrong, it was defined that way)

I love mathematics. But it sometimes takes much practice and effort to appreciate its logical purity and precision. I didn't like math in high school, but it wasn't till recently that I understood what it was about.

Anyway, I'm leaving this thread to allow for people to use illogical arguments as a reason for why "math is wrong". I'm sorry LiberalSkeptic that I got annoyed at you. I shouldn't have snapped like that. So, have at it guys.

Hey that is no problem! I appreciate you saying that, and yes I am a somewhat provoking as well. It takes to people to argue right?
I got my account here because I find other opinions interesting and because I want to learn about everything.
So everything you said, even though I make my "stupid" arguments against it, is something I do value.
And you know what, if I had not argued back we would not have had this interesting talk

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:59 AM

No sir. You are correct. In my knowledge of this subject I am proud and require more humility. I hope you forgive me for my arrogant behavior. They say that learning science and such things makes one humble, but I disagree. I think the more worldly knowledge you have the harder it is to not be proud. Thank you for chastising me. I will try to be more gentle and less arrogant online. The tongue--symbolically speaking--is the hardest organ to control.

Thank you for your kindness and gentleness. Best wishes.
edit on 1-9-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:59 AM
Double post.
edit on 1-9-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 11:18 AM

The idea of a quantum vacuum is just that, an idea. It is no more likely or unlikely than the possibility of a perfect vacuum. It simply shows that there is a possibility that something can be created from (or within) nothing. You could still have a perfect vacuum until such a time as particles appear within it and are obliterated by their antiparticle counterparts.When they vanish again, you are back to a perfect vacuum. If this is not the case, then there is no such thing as "nothing", which would contradict the idea of the quantum vacuum itself.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:29 PM
This argument seems silly to me when applied to mathematics.

I agree that when applied to science and physics the arguments are valid.

But I don't believe anyone would disagree with the statement that science is flawed and our knowledge of physics and the Universe is limited.

But when applied to mathematics infinity is only useful when applied in proportions.

Perhaps you should of titled this thread "Science is wrong" and not "Mathematics is wrong". Because all the arguments I've read apply to science and not mathematics.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:07 PM

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:03 PM
I agree with the OP in every aspect. I've recently felt the same way that zero is not nothing but rather should be replaced with infinity. It goes a long with energy and quantum physics nicely, also seems to support "enlightened" perspectives that all is one...or in this case, infinity

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 11:15 PM

Absolutely
In maths, 0 and ∞ are absolute values that are each others' reciprocals which is very convenient for processing formulae but that's in the theoretical world. It's harder to apply them in the real world because what we may think is zero or infinite may not be but it's close enough to those theororised limit values to not make any difference. The universe may actually not be truly infinite but, to our present ability to perceive what we can of it, it may as well be.

Guaranteed true infinities exist only on math theory and I have the power to create one right now (proceeds to divide a non-zero number by zero - behold my creation

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:19 AM

OP, wonderful topic and I am see where your going, and why and I agree.

I would recommend you look into a documentary on youtube or otherwise called "The Black Whole" and its done by a sevant named Nassim Haramein.

He basically covers everything your talking about in his approach to Einsteins dream of unifying the 4 fundimental forces. Aka, the theory of everything. Very good stuff mate appreciate the post

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 09:14 AM

Originally posted by 547000

That's what gets me. If you define infinite and zero to be the same thing you will very quickly realize why the system fails. This "tolerate everything under the sun" post-modernist phase of society denies the idea that absolute truth exists or is self consistent or at the very least logical.

Most people suppose that mathematics is an abstract game, but in reality it has very concrete roots and maybe a history of it would show it.
edit on 1-9-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

Using infinity instead of zero is not as radically different as you are assuming.

In fact, hardly anything about mathematics will change at all.

The benefit of this is it will be more apparent how mathematics is related to everything there is.

Moreover, it will instill a greater relationship between physics and mathematics to the point where they are seen as more of the same science.

There is hardly any difference between the infinity root and the 0 root, other than where 0 failed to actually have value, infinity does. That is not to say that infinity has a value of anything in particular, but that it has no particular value, so it appears as a 0, yet it is not.

Infinity appears as a zero. Zero is infinity misunderstood.

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 09:27 AM

What specific problems does your "right" math solve that the "wrong" math cannot? I.e. what real-world solutions does it offer?

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 09:32 AM

Good luck getting an answer to that.
This would have huge ramifications for set theory.
What would happen to the empty set and the infinite sets and cantor's theorem?

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 10:01 AM

Originally posted by john_bmth

What specific problems does your "right" math solve that the "wrong" math cannot? I.e. what real-world solutions does it offer?

In my opinion, the biggest question it answers is how the universe came to exist. It is a step forward in binding science and philosophy. It says, "there is a god". Whereas before, it said, "There is no God, we came from nothing".

I think this is the beginning of quantification of spirit so that your most highly credible scientists don't have to fear being shunned from the scientific community.

I think this is the beginning of a higher form of intelligence so subtle misunderstandings become known and resolved. Now we can officially work to serve the creator as a society because we know that that is what we are doing anyway.

All it mostly is is an affirmation that our existence isn't meaningless. What happens from here is a leap forward in a way that was previously impossible.

Its mostly psychological, for now, I guess.

That is not to say that it doesn't have any immediate mathematical and scientific uses. It answers the question, "what is a single point?". It answers the questions, "what is the God particle?", "where do 1d strings come from?". It answers the questions, "where do we come from?", "where are we going?", "what are we?".

It answers the question "what happens when we die?", which in and of itself has the power to eliminate fear in our society to an extent.

Truly, this has the power to change everything. It is a paradigm shifter.

What practical uses does it have? Shifting the paradigm. It has the power to change the world so that it will fastly become optimistically unrecognizable.

new topics

top topics

39