/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12482924

2MiB, 1920x1080, fag.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

greatest fag on earth?

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 07:32:25 2020 No.12482924 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12483105 >>12483563 >>12483638

>real numbers are bad because muh infinite decimal expansions hurr durr
>let's work with polynumbers, which can have infinite "tails" and we agree that there's an infinite number of zeros unless otherwise stated
Wildbergfags, explain this

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 09:06:28 No.12483105 Report

Quoted By: >>12483771

>>12482924
Terrible bait. There are not an infinite number of zeros at the tail. All he is saying is that tailing zeros don't matter. I can write [1, 0, 2, 3, 0, 0, 0 and that is equivalent to [1, 0, 2, 3 which is equivalent to [1, 0, 2, 3, 0.
Your tail can be arbitrarily long; however, that is not the same as saying your rational polynumber has an infinite number of tailing zeros, since your rational polynumber is purely a finite expression. If you would like to think there is an infinite tail because you are delusional, that is your choice but wildberger never states that there is.
Also
>>real numbers are bad because muh infinite decimal expansions hurr durr
Just because you put "hurr durr" at the end does not make your argument correct. When you write "sqrt(2)" in any of the """real number""" constructions, you take it to mean an object that involves an infinite amount of information (e.g. has an infinite sets) or requires an infinite amount of work to construct (e.g. infinite fractions).
You might like to imagine you are able to do an infinite amount of work or you are able to manipulate an infinite amount of information. But that does not make it okay to assume it so by just stating the """a(>>>/x/)iom of infinity""". Please watch the video again and stop being so retarded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 12:17:07 No.12483563 Report

Quoted By:

>>12482924
GET DOWN ON YER KNEES AND GIVE PRAISE!

PRAISE THE HOLY BURGER!

Yes. Praise. Praise for the Holy Burger. For he shall lead us into finite salvation and cast down into HELL those infinity loving GOD CURSED SODOMITES!

Amen.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 12:18:57 No.12483570 Report

Quoted By:

tfw when u cant accept that empiricism is a meme

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 12:32:43 No.12483599 Report

Quoted By: >>12483730

"Polynumber" is just his special snowflake term for a polynomial. Ignore Wildsperger.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1608216093002.jpg, 85KiB, 881x720

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 12:52:26 No.12483638 Report

Quoted By: >>12483682 >>12483693 >>12483741

>>12482924
>polynumber
Renaming existing concepts and claiming them as your inventions is a great way to make a legacy.

It's funny how he uses the word
>Dihedron,
which already denotes something entirely unrelated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihedron
to denote some matrix base elements that have been studied forever too
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion_algebra
Norm becomes
>Quadrance
etc. etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_number

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 13:14:04 No.12483682 Report

Quoted By:

>>12483638
What did you expect from a jew

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 13:21:11 No.12483693 Report

Quoted By: >>12483694 >>12483823 >>12483851 >>12483856

>>12483638
Are you some kind of retard? He never claims to have invented this stuff.
He refers to dihedrons in the context of the dihedral group:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihedral_group
Yes this has been studied forever, and no he never claims to have invented this. Also, the dihedral group is not the same as the quaternion group you mouth-breathing moron, he even says that it's different in the video he starts talking about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion_group#Compared_to_dihedral_group
Yes, it is very similar to the quaternion group but it has a different group structure.
He also repeatedly says quadrance is the square of length (so it is "quadratic" in the square of length).
Do you want him to keep saying "squares of length" or "length squared" whenever he wants to talk about the concept? Quadrance is a fundamental building block for his rational trigonometry, so of course it makes sense to give the concept a name. I don't understand why have such a stick up your ass about him defining a concept, attributing where the idea came from (he never claims to have invented this shit), and giving it a name.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 13:22:38 No.12483694 Report

Quoted By: >>12483823

>>12483693
sorry, meant quadrance is "quadratic" in the length (not the square of the length).

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 13:44:39 No.12483730 Report

Quoted By:

>>12483599
You will burn in HELL, for a finite length of time, YOU SODOMITE!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 13:50:22 No.12483741 Report

Quoted By:

>>12483638
my favorite is his "chromogeometry" because apparently Euclidean geometry, Lorentzian geometry etc. are too boring and should be called "blue" and "red" and "green" geometries lmfao

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 14:00:08 No.12483771 Report

Quoted By:

>>12483105
Honest question, do you have convergence defined? How do u define the number x that a series converges to and that fulfills x^2=2?
Does the series not converge in your system?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 14:19:11 No.12483823 Report

Quoted By: >>12483885

>>12483694
>>12483693
In Wildberger's system, "length" is not even a well-defined concept and calling it "square of the length" defeats the whole purpose of rational trigonometry.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 14:30:32 No.12483851 Report

Quoted By: >>12483856 >>12483885

>>12483693
>mouth-breathing moron
>up your ass
Why are you so attached to Wildberger as to use swear words in his name?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 14:31:40 No.12483856 Report

Quoted By:

>>12483693
based
>>12483851
seething

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 14:44:56 No.12483885 Report

Quoted By:

>>12483823
Yeah, that's fair. Since his rational trigonometry supposedly extends to other finite fields, the concept of length doesn't have to be strictly defined there. So that makes the anon who I was replying to even more wrong.

>>12483851
It's because the entire post was blatantly false. He probably doesn't like wildberger for some reason and his math isn't incorrect so he had to find something else to shitpost about.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Dec 2020 15:48:20 No.12484024 Report

Quoted By:

>muh spread polynoomials!
YAWN... Wildsperger's special snowflake version of Chebyshev polynomials
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/47520/spread-polynomials

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