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.
Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by assspeaker
Well if you want to go philosophic, wouldn't infinity include everything? It would include all numbers, both rational and irrational, as well as imaginary numbers, and... dare I say... 0?
Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by djeminy
If ∞ has no affiliation with numbers what so ever, then tell me what 1/0 is. To say that it is undefined is only one narrow aspect to the situation... 0 in theory would go into 1 an infinite number of times. AND the slope for a vertical line does not only approach ∞ in the limit, but also most logically meets it.
Then again, all of limits must also be useless because ∞ does not involve any numbers whatsoever...?
Originally posted by Wookiep
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Wookiep
You can prove faulty reasoning and the incorrect use of concepts.
But if you are Physics thinks the reasoning is sound and concepts are valid to use as numbers...I would love the answers to these.
1/large = ?
1/small = ?
1/huge = ?
1/finite = ?
Oh good luck with that. If you can't grasp the ideas that you obviously disagree with as CONCEPT and THEORY and QUESTIONING then you don't belong here. I don't believe the answers to this "reasoning" as you put it were claimed to be solved by the OP. You're asking the question to provoke and troll, period. Go troll somewhere else until you can add something valuable rather than circular arguments that you think pertain to the OP, but don't.edit on 20-3-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by circlemaker
Originally posted by djeminy
Originally posted by kykweer
reply to post by PhysicsAdept
If u split an apple in half, and split half the apple in half and half of half then half of that half to infinity... Will there eventually be zero apple left?
No. You'll never be able to get rid of the apple that way.
And of course you don't need to split the apple in half first.
just take a tiny bit of the apple and start splitting this apple
part in half from there on; as sooner or later you would have
reached this point anyway, had you started from scratch!
Cheers
Originally posted by kykweer
Originally posted by UKLionheart
Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by UKLionheart
Would you say then, that .000000000000000000000000000000...1 equals 0?
Hahaha. No, because you can't have infinite 0 before the one. As soon as you put that one on the end, it is no longer 0., but with 0.999 going off into infinity, that's different!
Here's the proof of the0.99999 recurring thing:
Let's call x = 0.99999 recurring.
10 x= 9.999999 recurring
deduct x from both sides:
9 x = 9 therefore x = 1
therefore 1 = 0.9999 recurring.
Tralahhhhh!
The question isn't the math, its a logical question in relation to infinity as infinity is more or less an absolute value. So 10 times infinity minus infinity is a contradiction as 10 times infinity equals 1 infinity equals 2 million times infinity.
Again subtracting infinity from infinity is like subtracting a chicken from a horse.
Because 10x - x = 0.999r - x
9x = x (infinity stays the same at a given point in time)
Therefore infinity = infinity
Tralahhhhh!
Hasn't that crap formula been debunked like hundreds of time? Gosh I swear its like nibiru
edit on 20-3-2012 by kykweer because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-3-2012 by kykweer because: (no reason given)
Prior to the concept of negative numbers, negative solutions to problems were considered "false" and equations requiring negative solutions were described as absurd
Although Greek mathematician and engineer Heron of Alexandria is noted as the first to have conceived these numbers,[2][3] Rafael Bombelli first set down the rules for multiplication in the complex numbers in 1572. The concept had appeared in print earlier, for instance in work by Gerolamo Cardano. At the time, such numbers were poorly understood and regarded by some as fictitious or useless, much as zero and the negative numbers once were. Many other mathematicians were slow to adopt the use of imaginary numbers, including René Descartes, who wrote about them in his La Géométrie, where the term imaginary was used and meant to be derogatory.
Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by MeesterB
So then at infinity, would it not equal 0?
I mean, at a very large number it would equal close to zero but we are not talking about a number at all. We are talking about a concept. So then conceptually, would not 1/∞=0?
I don't think this is something that can be over-thought, but I do think that there is some answer out there that will make it more clear...
Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by OccamAssassin
This is a bit off topic in a way I suppose... But can you prove there is wind, even though there are no equations to define it?