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.

 

Simple Equation For A Theory Of Everything

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   

1 =  ∞



Sorry if this has been discussed before but it really made me think.

This morning I was listening to C2C with guest Dr. Kaku, and a caller brought up this equation, sort of in comparison to this famous equation, E = MC2.

1 = intelligence  
This could mean any intelligent "being" capable of thought, or reason, like you, or I. (in order for the equation to work, you must subscribe to the idea that you are "real", that you exist)  


   ∞  (Infinity) = very simply, anything you can imagine...Every possibility, any possibility exists somewhere in our Universe.

Now, if you replace the 1 with a 0....no intelligent life = 0 (no existence, no Universe)

Thoughts?




posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Already beat you to it.

Thread from 2009 : Final Theory

Also you don't need to put "=1" because that is implied by not having it there in the first place.

edit on 7-12-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   
We need quantum computers to calculate it accurately though.

But how do you block cosmic rays from screwing the calculations up? That's the real question.


Now the infinity symbol effectively represents the greatest possible sets of numerical values for all possible variables.

Every possible variation is included, and nothing is excluded.

edit on 7-12-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


So what was M Kaku's reply to this caller?

You didn't really mention that part. I am curious to know.

I haven't spoken with Kaku since 2000, and it wasn't until 8 years later that I discovered this and so I haven't had the chance to question him about it.

If you can find a link to the show please share. Thanks.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals


1 =  ∞



Sorry if this has been discussed before but it really made me think.

This morning I was listening to C2C with guest Dr. Kaku, and a caller brought up this equation, sort of in comparison to this famous equation, E = MC2.

1 = intelligence  
This could mean any intelligent "being" capable of thought, or reason, like you, or I. (in order for the equation to work, you must subscribe to the idea that you are "real", that you exist)  


   ∞  (Infinity) = very simply, anything you can imagine...Every possibility, any possibility exists somewhere in our Universe.

Now, if you replace the 1 with a 0....no intelligent life = 0 (no existence, no Universe)

Thoughts?


You got it all wrong!

∞/0 = ∞²



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

∞/0 = ∞²




∞ / 0 = undefined

∞² = ∞

So I don't think you are right.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   

So for dividing by zero – what is the number of cookies that each person receives when 10 cookies are evenly distributed amongst 0 people? Certain words can be pinpointed in the question to highlight the problem. The problem with this question is the "when". There is no way to distribute 10 cookies amongst 0 people. In mathematical jargon, a set of 10 items cannot be partitioned into 0 subsets. So , at least in elementary arithmetic, is said to be either meaningless, or undefined.


Division by Zero wiki



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
You got it all wrong!

∞/0 = ∞²


Which is still infinity.

0, 1, and infinity are the only numbers who's squares and square roots are the same thing. You can see where the whole numbers and square roots converge for 0 and 1 in this pic:


As for 1 = infinity, I'm just going to have to straight up disagree. It makes no sense within the context of mathematics.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Infinity isn't an actual mathematical value, mathematicians use it to make large calculations easier...

scienceblogs.com...

There are some mathematicians who hate the idea of using Infinity in their calculations.

There's a good doc about it from the BBC, you might not be able to watch it:

www.bbc.co.uk...

But you might find it elsewhere online.

From the BBC here's a good explanation of why you cant use it as a number:

www.bbc.co.uk...
edit on 7-12-2011 by roughycannon because: added another link



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by circlemaker


As for 1 = infinity, I'm just going to have to straight up disagree. It makes no sense within the context of mathematics.


Well you are straight up wrong about that.

1) There are infinite possible points in between zero and one.

2) Infinity is one infinite set of variables.

It's a paradox. A 'variable' is defined as "Having no fixed quantitative value", whereas infinity is a fixed value with no fixed value.
edit on 7-12-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)


It is plural and singular at the same time.
edit on 7-12-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Thanks for the link, missed that one.

M. Kaku's response was a reference to his Unified Field Theory (as mentioned in your thread).

When I heard it my first thoughts were not related to math, although obviously it's a math equation.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
I retract my previous equation. I don't think it describes the universe

I now claim this one is correct:

Ω=Ω

Indeed, it has a deep meaning.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Solve for X:

X > ∞

Reveals that:
X = undefined (irrational)

But if you solve for:

X < ∞
It is clearly not ∞ nor is it undefined.

X / ∞ = undefined (irrational)
∞ / X = undefined (irrational)

But:
∞ / ∞ = 1
∞² = ∞

If anyone wants to try to correct this, go for it. But please provide explanations, I am always willing to make corrections or learn new ideas.

Supplemental links :
Infinity wiki
limits of infinity
e , Euler's number
infinite set
infinitesimal calculus
Georg Cantor
Leonhard Euler
Gottfried Leibniz
Infinity (Philosophy)
edit on 7-12-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I retract my previous equation. I don't think it describes the universe

I now claim this one is correct:

Ω=Ω

Indeed, it has a deep meaning.


Please define omega. There are about a dozen possible definitions for this symbol.
Are you referring to The Omega Constant?
Ωe^Ω = 1



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by circlemaker


As for 1 = infinity, I'm just going to have to straight up disagree. It makes no sense within the context of mathematics.


Well you are straight up wrong about that.

1) There are infinite possible points in between zero and one.

2) Infinity is one infinite set of variables.


Infinity is the farthest possible thing from 0. You're using it in a different context. When defining a "set" you don't use an equal sign. The op used an equal sign.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Any comments / thoughts on the assumption that if there is no intelligent life to observe it, the Universe wouldn't exist?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
∞ / ∞ = 1


Actually it's both +1 and -1. Infinity, like 0, has no polarity.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by circlemaker

Originally posted by muzzleflash
∞ / ∞ = 1


Actually it's both +1 and -1. Infinity, like 0, has no polarity.


If it doesn't, why do we integrate from - to + infinity in some cases?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Any comments / thoughts on the assumption that if there is no intelligent life to observe it, the Universe wouldn't exist?


It's illogical.

No one can observe the lava under our feet, but is it really there? Yes it is there.

Existence is not reliant upon observation, but observation is reliant upon existence.

The tree that falls in the woods when no one heard it still falls despite the lack of observation of such.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by circlemaker

Originally posted by muzzleflash
∞ / ∞ = 1


Actually it's both +1 and -1. Infinity, like 0, has no polarity.


If it doesn't, why do we integrate from - to + infinity in some cases?


+/-infinity defines which direction you take to get there. You can go towards infinity in the positive or negative directions but once you're there it's all the same thing.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join