/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11954964

21KiB, 581x538, dl7NZtldJXQ.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

i fallacy

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 22:46:11 2020 No.11954964 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11958914 >>11959116 >>11959950 >>11959981 >>11961068 >>11961157 >>11961386 >>11961477 >>11961592

The previous one was just wiped out for whatever reason: https://warosu.org/sci/thread/11954084
I want to believe it was erased by an accident, so I want to continue the discussion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2020 09:35:08 No.11956203 Report

Quoted By:

You can't do math with numbers that aren't real

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2020 21:19:36 No.11957936 Report

Quoted By:

Christ you lot have never heard of Minkowski space.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2020 21:25:34 No.11957965 Report

Quoted By:

>>11956119
>>|x| = -1 has no solution

because absolute value is sqrt(x^2). square root of any number is multivalued. It's never just -1.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2020 21:49:37 No.11958066 Report

Quoted By: >>11959961

>>11955077
>Can you substract a distance? Sure you can.
no you cant
distance is nonnegative, displacement could be negative

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1581186397065.png, 87KiB, 800x1023

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 03:07:13 No.11958886 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1586515805451.png, 69KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 03:08:19 No.11958889 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 03:27:13 No.11958914 Report

Quoted By: >>11958918 >>11959950

>>11954964
Nice job OP! You showed why having the inner product defined to be $Z_{1} \cdot Z_{2}$ isn't plausible, and instead why it is instead defined to be $Z_{1} \cdot \bar Z_{2}$ .

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 03:27:28 No.11958916 Report

Quoted By: >>11959107 >>11959603

>math is a set of extremely rigorous rules that must apply equally everywhere and that's what makes it so powerful
*applies math*
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I didn't mean to say "everywhere" this is the complex plane please don't touch it look I'll make a special rule where the norm is the absolute value of i and that somehow makes 1 please use that ok thanks now mods delete the thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 03:28:14 No.11958918 Report

Quoted By:

>>11958914
>instead why it is instead
Excuse the 'tism.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 04:02:53 No.11958962 Report

Quoted By:

>>11956119
x^2 is a function that is meant to map a function from R to R, but that doesn't work so it we extended it's codomain and range to C and C.
|x| is a function that is meant to map a function from any domain to R+, so it makes sense that it can't be -1.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 05:14:13 No.11959100 Report

Quoted By:

>>11955093
>ITT people with zero mathematical experience talk about mathematics
>i is of positive value, it being one.
Well, you're clearly right about the first point, you fucking mouth-breather

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 05:16:50 No.11959107 Report

Quoted By: >>11959157 >>11959923

>>11958916
>math is a set of extremely rigorous rules
>breaks a rule
>NOOOOOOOOOOOO its supposed to work Everywhere, thats why math is so useful
>you shouldnt have to be careful with rigorous and stringent rules that have many assumptions and caveats

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 05:18:47 No.11959116 Report

Quoted By:

>>11954964
i don't understand. i is a defined quantity. you don't 'prove' that it exists, you define its existence. it doesn't matter whether or not it 'actually' exists, whatever the fuck that means. math is a model of the world, not the world itself

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 05:35:10 No.11959157 Report

Quoted By: >>11959602

>>11959107
did this rule come in package with the discovery of complex numbers, or was it bandaged after that as a way of coping and preventing the house of cards from collapsing?
you can't just come up with a set of numbers, put them right next to the reals in terms of validity, and then screech "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DONT USE THEM LIKE THAT THEY'RE SPECIAAAAAAL EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY IS SPECIAAAAAAAAAAL" like a retard

Don't get me wrong I also want the complex numbers to exist. But I disagree that they're being used like this and that anyone who tries to construct this triangle just sees the zero hypotenuse which then makes his mind black out and the possibility that there can be an imaginary length is completely permanently discarded as if he's about to get drowned for it. Instead the NPC reply about the absolute value is queued up and he just walks away as if nothing happened and as if he should be completely complacent with the absolute state of math right now. Within this set of rules and reflexive ignorance, you can't even divide by zero without inventing 10 layers of abstract cope around it. There's a problem and running away is not the solution. Yes, it's in the very basics but that doesn't make it any less mature of a problem than solving a major unsolved problem.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 10:33:40 No.11959602 Report

Quoted By: >>11959603

>>11959157
see>>11954976 and cope more

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 10:34:03 No.11959603 Report

Quoted By: >>11959638 >>11960591

>>11959602
see >>11958916

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 10:54:04 No.11959628 Report

Quoted By:

>>11955017
Distances (that is, the function that generates metric spaces) is axiomatically defines as always positive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_space#Definition

If you want to have negative distances, you will have to create another type of space that isn't metric

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 11:00:11 No.11959638 Report

Quoted By:

>>11959603
lol what? how does
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
change anything?
if you see something that clearly looks like its length should be 1, and then you find out that its length is indeed 1, how could this possibly strike you as inconsistent?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 11:10:03 No.11959668 Report

Quoted By:

The length of i on the complex plane is 1 because the complex space is a real space where one of the axes is mapped to the imaginary number line.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 11:23:04 No.11959700 Report

Quoted By: >>11959759

What the fuck is going on in this thread? Is there supposed to be something weird/unintuitive/contradictory about the length of i being 1?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 11:55:52 No.11959759 Report

Quoted By:

>>11959700
but how though? nothing about a point located exactly 1 unit above the origin along the positive y-axis having the exact length that you'd expect—1—strikes me as weird or unintuitive or contradictory in any way. i don't get why anyone's trying to pretend that there's anything controversial about this, unless maybe they have very very low spatial intelligence, but i don't like assuming flaws like that in other people i don't know

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:31:38 No.11959923 Report

Quoted By: >>11960591

>>11959107
>>breaks a rule
what rule?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:45:57 No.11959950 Report

Quoted By: >>11960577

>>11954964
>>11954972
>>11954978
>>11955032
>>11958914

The OP is describing a 2D Minkowski space. Rotations correspond to Lorenz transformations null length vectors represent the path of light rays. It should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that this is a pseudo-Euclidean space. This thread seems to be a magnet for smooth brains.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:49:16 No.11959961 Report

Quoted By: >>11959963

>>11958066
10kg - 9.999...kg = 0

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:51:17 No.11959963 Report

Quoted By: >>11959968 >>11959998

>>11959961
but weight can't be negative therefore 10kg -9.999...kg = 0.00....001kg

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:53:11 No.11959966 Report

Quoted By:

>>11956028
have you even read the definition of complex numbers?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:53:30 No.11959968 Report

Quoted By: >>11959971

>>11959963
no, 0.00....001kg would be the difference between 10kg and 9.99...999kg

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:56:10 No.11959971 Report

Quoted By: >>11959974 >>11959998

>>11959968
that's what im saying it, how can weight be negative? therefore contradiction, that;s the proof

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:56:52 No.11959974 Report

Quoted By: >>11959977

>>11959971
i don't get what proof but ok

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 13:59:09 No.11959977 Report

Quoted By: >>11959983 >>11959998

>>11959974
how can weight or distance be negative brainlet, i just proved it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 14:01:26 No.11959981 Report

Quoted By:

>>11954964
I answered it here >>11928235

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 14:02:04 No.11959983 Report

Quoted By:

>>11959977
what was supposed to be negative in any of that i don't get it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 14:10:16 No.11959998 Report

Quoted By:

>>11959963
>>11959971
>>11959977
check this out man
15kg - 20kg = -5kg
but weight can't be negative therefore -5 > 0

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 17:40:01 No.11960577 Report

Quoted By:

>>11959950
Thank you. Finally someone with a brain.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 17:45:00 No.11960591 Report

Quoted By: >>11960625

>>11959603
learn what a metric is you dumb nigger
all geometry is done with respect to a certain metric
>>11959923
learn what a metric is you dumb nigger

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 17:56:54 No.11960625 Report

Quoted By: >>11961635

>>11960591
What rule?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 20:58:32 No.11961068 Report

Quoted By:

>>11954964
>I want to believe it was erased by an accident
You're imagining things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 21:09:46 No.11961112 Report

Quoted By:

Why does /sci/ have these endless debates? Holy shit. Do you guys never learn anything? Look up modulus of a complex number.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO this will explain everything.png, 127KiB, 800x800

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 21:17:52 No.11961157 Report

Quoted By: >>11961397

>>11954964

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 21:29:46 No.11961210 Report

Quoted By: >>11961353

>>11954972
don't many things in math come from asking these retarded questions

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 21:57:41 No.11961353 Report

Quoted By:

>>11961210
no, you don’t have an imaginary distance, and no one thinks you do. it’s a different kind of retarded, not the constructive kind

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 22:08:41 No.11961386 Report

Quoted By:

>>11954964
>Uses imaginary distances when the L2 metric is only meant for non-negative real distances as far as I'm aware.
>GuiSe i brOke MaTH
A distance of 1-i or i-1 or |1-i| = |i-1| = ?2 would sort of make sense, but you have to add more precision to the regular framework if you want to include more numbers. The Minowski metric kinda cheats in negatives but I think that's about as far as you can push the rules.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO travel.png, 127KiB, 3000x3000

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 22:11:03 No.11961390 Report

Quoted By: >>11961426 >>11961440

>>11954972
>negative distance?
YES

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 22:13:23 No.11961397 Report

Quoted By:

>>11961157
it's a singularity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 22:19:59 No.11961426 Report

Quoted By:

>>11961390
This is incomprehensible as any of the diagrams from mochizuki's paper or Jordan Peterson's books

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 22:24:05 No.11961440 Report

Quoted By:

>>11961390
low iq post

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 22:29:49 No.11961477 Report

Quoted By:

>>11954964
you use a distance d(z, w) = sqrt{(z.x-w.x)^2 + i(z.y-w.y)^2}, now let's apply this to d(0,i) = +i, a well defined distance map maps every point to the reals. So... it is not well defined.

If you want to give a proper distance definition you have to define
d(z, w) := \sqrt{z-w * \overline{z-w}}.
The "paradox" is solved:
let z = 1, w = i, then
d(z, w) = \sqrt{1-i * 1+i} = \sqrt{2}

The reason is: we want to deal with "distance" not direction (and i gives a "direction" or an orientation).

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1580352290460.png, 90KiB, 747x2078

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 23:01:04 No.11961592 Report

Quoted By:

>>11954964
How long can we push this before we cause the inevitable false vacuum collapse?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2020 23:15:44 No.11961635 Report

Quoted By: >>11962053

>>11960625
the rule that a metric maps onto the nonnegative reals you dumb nigger

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2020 00:46:45 No.11962053 Report

Quoted By:

>>11961635
you are being very toxic

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches