/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11171116

972KiB, 1909x2037, TIMESAND___771zr5zvr65bf1zbx275ug37ip0b09n45cc7c33injin.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Thread about the numbers.

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 18:32:40 2019 No.11171116 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11171125 >>11171126 >>11171800

Discuss real numbers and the foolishness of those who think only some of them exist.

$\mathbb{R}=(-n,n)~~\text{ for some }~~n\in\mathbb{B}$

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 18:37:47 No.11171125 Report

Quoted By: >>11171168

>>11171116
Tooker, if you agree that by adding $i$ to the real numbers creates a whole set of numbers that are not real, why do you reject the possibility that by adding infinity hat to the real numbers you could create a bunch of numbers that are not real?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 18:37:47 No.11171126 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171116
infinity hat is not a real number, jonny

El Arcón

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 18:53:33 No.11171168 Report

Quoted By: >>11171191 >>11171192 >>11171199 >>11171235

>>11171125
Why do phrase your question in a way that ignore the very obvious truth which I have repeated for you thousands of times:
$\infty\not\in\mathbb{R} ~\text{?}$

To explain to the spectators how fucking stupid you are, consider the interval I = (0,5), and consider some transcendental real number Q that has the property 2 < Q < 3. Now consider the number
x = 7 - Q

By your fucking retarded reasoning, x is not in I because 7 is not in I. By mathematical reasoning, to the contrary, x is in I because
(0,5) = (0, 7 - Q ] U ( 7-Q ,5) = (0,x] U (x,5).

You're a fucking idiot and everything you say is stupid as fuck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:03:18 No.11171191 Report

Quoted By: >>11171212

>>11171168
You misunderstood my point. When you mix the complex unit to the real numbers and allow you to perform the usual operations on both the complex unit and the usual reals, you create a whole new set, most of which are NOT real. My question to you was that why do you just assume that when you do the same procedure with infinity hat, everything you get by adding and substracting reals and infinity hats is more reals?

Of course, they COULD be reals, as your example shows, but you need to PROVE it. Where is your proof?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:03:40 No.11171192 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171168
lel mad schizo. Tooker best /sci/ schizoposter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:07:30 No.11171199 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171168
tooker's condition seems to be deteriorating lately
poor guy

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO real numbers.png, 104KiB, 655x963

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:08:19 No.11171200 Report

Quoted By:

this always makes me smile

El Arcón

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO TIMESAND___2u2f9f6g6efj96rffbjdg (...).png, 35KiB, 831x486

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:14:24 No.11171212 Report

Quoted By: >>11171225 >>11171235 >>11171274

>>11171191
I didn't misunderstand your point. Is you accept that the real numbers are the open interval (-inf,inf), then "inf-hat - b" is a real number for any 0 < b < n with n some natural number. If you don't accept that R=(-inf,inf) then say it clearly. The proof is in the paper.

http://www.vixra.org/abs/1811.0222

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:18:28 No.11171225 Report

Quoted By: >>11171234

>>11171212
Why? Define $(i, i + 1)$ as the straight open segment that connects i and i + 1. Both i + 0.5 and i + 0.49 are members but their difference is not. I.e. this is not a general property that applies to any open interval. PROVE YOUR PROPOSITIONS, TOOKER

El Arcón

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:22:58 No.11171234 Report

Quoted By: >>11171235 >>11171241

>>11171225
What you wrote is so stupid that it demonstrates you must not be completely fucking retarded, but rather you must have some spark of intelligence to have separated out such a profoundly stupid counterpoint from the space off possible counterpoints you might have selected.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:26:56 No.11171235 Report

Quoted By: >>11171242

>>11171168
>>11171212
>>11171234
lmao this guy is legit insane, isn't he

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:31:00 No.11171241 Report

Quoted By: >>11171255

>>11171234
It is an illustration that just because you can define something as an interval, their elements do not necessarily adhere to group structures. In fact, I'd argue much less with weird constructs like what your hat notation suggests. I would expect a really long and rigorous proof of this because, if your proof of RH is true, then that means that the inherent difficulty of proving RH is being transferred to proving that your infinity hat has that property.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:31:20 No.11171242 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171235
You must be new here. Tooker's been /sci/'s resident schizophrenic for years now.

El Arcón

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO TIMESAND___f-6-3867810dreukjrhwy (...).gif, 1MiB, 300x300

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:39:59 No.11171255 Report

Quoted By: >>11171261 >>11171264

>>11171241
You're ignoring, deliberately, obviously, you troll, that if a number X is defined as the difference between two other numbers X = Y - Z, then X is in the interval (A,B) whenever
A < (Y-Z) < B .

Literally nothing else matters, certainly not complex numbers or group structure.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:45:00 No.11171261 Report

Quoted By: >>11171274

>>11171255
>if you agree that by adding ii to the real numbers creates a whole set of numbers that are not real, why do you reject the possibility that by adding infinity hat to the real numbers you could create a bunch of numbers that are not real?
this question remains unanswered

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:48:14 No.11171264 Report

Quoted By: >>11171277

>>11171255
>then X is in the interval (A,B) whenever
>A < (Y-Z) < B .

"X is in interval whenever X is in the interval"
Are you hearing yourself Tooker? A < X < B is just another definition of being in the interval. Cool tautology, but we are talking theorems here.

El Arcón

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO TIMESAND___2u2f9f6g6efj96rffbjdg (...).png, 35KiB, 831x486

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:51:37 No.11171274 Report

Quoted By: >>11171290

>>11171261
It does not remain unanswered.
>>11171212

Infinity hat and infinity are the same number. By adding infinity to the reals, we create the extended reals. Everything in the extended reals which is not equal to infinity is in the reals. For 0<b<n, the number
x = inf-hat - b

is in the extended reals and it is not equal to infinity. Therefore, it is impossible for it to be anything other than a real number. Thusly, I reject the possibility that "x" might not be a real number because it is provably impossible for it to be anything else.

El Arcón

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:53:31 No.11171277 Report

Quoted By: >>11171286

>>11171264
>A < X < B is just another definition of being in the interval.
Yes, that's exactly correct. It is because of the definition of being in the interval that I reject the possibility that (inf-hat - b) might not be in the interval (0,inf).

El Arcón

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO TIMESAND___paw999967id29ref8786w (...).jpg, 134KiB, 900x675

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:55:54 No.11171283 Report

Quoted By:

Worse is coming your way, you deniers of the truth.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:57:12 No.11171286 Report

Quoted By: >>11171311

>>11171277
But that was defined in the context of real numbers. It breaks down regarding infinity hat unless you prove it is a real number.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 19:58:30 No.11171290 Report

Quoted By: >>11171311

>>11171274
you need to define what inf - x means for a real number x

El Arcón

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 20:05:53 No.11171311 Report

Quoted By: >>11171316 >>11171327

>>11171286
No actually, the interval I used was the set of all horse warrior numbers
$\mathbb{H}_{WN}=(-\infty,\infty)$

because I wanted to demonstrate that the properties of intervals don't depend on whether or not the interval is an interval of reals.

>>11171290
I have done this several times.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 20:07:42 No.11171316 Report

Quoted By: >>11171322

>>11171311
>because I wanted to demonstrate that the properties of intervals don't depend on whether or not the interval is an interval of reals.

But then why doesn't the property hold for the interval I showed you? (i, i+1)?

El Arcón

El Arcón Sat 23 Nov 2019 20:09:24 No.11171322 Report

Quoted By: >>11171334

>>11171316
>But then why doesn't the property hold for the interval I showed you? (i, i+1)?
It doesn't hold because you have an interval of imaginary numbers and you asked whether a real number was in it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 20:10:21 No.11171327 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171311
>I have done this several times.
not in this thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 20:12:04 No.11171334 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171322
Well, infinity hat is probably the wildest construct of imagination ever conceived. We will require proof.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 23 Nov 2019 23:17:16 No.11171800 Report

Quoted By:

>>11171116
(-0,0)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Nov 2019 13:15:32 No.11173132 Report

Quoted By:

2kr UWU

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Nov 2019 04:06:14 No.11174966 Report

Quoted By: >>11174979

is the B the barnett integrable functions?

El Arcón

El Arcón Mon 25 Nov 2019 04:10:21 No.11174979 Report

Quoted By:

>>11174966
it's (((based)))

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