/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12513577

135KiB, 1080x1207, 132637497_388305072432501_239504629579748349_n.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 16:28:10 2020 No.12513577 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12513734 >>12513737 >>12513739 >>12513754 >>12513774 >>12514190 >>12514224 >>12514409 >>12514430 >>12514481

Are there any numbers smaller than 0?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 16:31:03 No.12513588 Report

Quoted By:

depends on the font size

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 16:38:14 No.12513606 Report

Quoted By: >>12513766

In terms of density, technically not.
but I'll construct them right now.
a number x such that is has true negative density.
I'll called them nigger numbers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:15:05 No.12513734 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
-1/12

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 42342352345345234123425453.gif, 113KiB, 498x594

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:16:04 No.12513737 Report

Quoted By: >>12513855

>>12513577
-0

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO yes..jpg, 1KiB, 51x32

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:17:51 No.12513739 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
As you can see, 1 is smaller than 0, it takes up less pixels

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:20:08 No.12513746 Report

Quoted By: >>12513749 >>12513752 >>12513757 >>12513758 >>12513766 >>12514392

Is it possible to define a type of number such that

|x| < 0 ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:21:34 No.12513749 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513746

negative length?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:22:17 No.12513752 Report

Quoted By: >>12513766

>>12513746
No, that's not possible just by the definition of absolute value

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:23:33 No.12513754 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
Yes. The number of women you have slept with

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:24:34 No.12513757 Report

Quoted By: >>12513766

>>12513746
This nigga doing alien math right hear

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:25:01 No.12513758 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513746
Yes, you can define the ultrareals which are just like the reals but for which the norm is defined by
|x| = {x if x<0; -x if x>=0}

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:28:00 No.12513766 Report

Quoted By: >>12514392

>>12513746
Yes I literally do it right here faggot >>12513606
>>12513752
>this is the same guy that sucks the dick of imaginary numbers
kek like pottery
>>12513757
I doubt aliens do math

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO mhmmm-das-right.jpg, 71KiB, 400x400

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 17:33:42 No.12513774 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
>Are there any numbers smaller than 0?
Yep. They're imaginaries for Kikecucks. They believe 'Those' imaginary things. Science & math does not. Thankfully.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 18:04:09 No.12513855 Report

Quoted By: >>12513890

>>12513737
Actually it’s +0. Think about it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 18:18:12 No.12513890 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513855
Das rite. Square root of minus one (0.000...1) is minus one. The square of minus one (0.000...1) is minus one. Plus zero is infinitesimal infinity, not minus zero.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO comment_1594136617MnWCze54NOp8T9 (...).jpg, 134KiB, 600x600

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 18:43:11 No.12513928 Report

Quoted By: >>12513948

When I was taking a computer architecture class in uni there was a question that asked what was the "smallest" signed integer you could get from 32 bits. I answered 0 and my professor told me I was a brainlet because -2^32 + 1 was "smaller" than zero.

Intuitively it never made sense to mento say that a negative number is "smaller" than a positive one, but the trauma has stayed with me since.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 18:48:09 No.12513948 Report

Quoted By: >>12513954 >>12514192

>>12513928
what part of -1 < 0 is not intuitive?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 18:50:04 No.12513954 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513948
|-1| > |0|

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 20:31:56 No.12514190 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
Well, if you look at 0, you can define it as the smallest non-negative number or the greatest non-positive number. So it depends on how you see it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 20:34:32 No.12514192 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513948
It doesn't say that a negative number is smaller than a positive one, it says that it is "less than". We define < as "less than" and not as "smaller than".

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20201204-105157_Free (...).jpg, 390KiB, 917x1028

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 20:47:04 No.12514224 Report

Quoted By: >>12514527

>>12513577

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 21:48:45 No.12514392 Report

Quoted By: >>12514657

>>12513746
Not without redefining what a norm is.

>>12513766
Complex numbers don't cause contradictions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 21:53:28 No.12514409 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
kurva anyád

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 22:01:26 No.12514430 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
puffy vulva

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 22:24:44 No.12514481 Report

Quoted By:

>>12513577
Is that a man

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 22:43:35 No.12514527 Report

Quoted By:

>>12514224
Pedo

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 23:13:33 No.12514612 Report

Quoted By:

.01
Because part of zero is less than all of zero..

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 23:22:58 No.12514657 Report

Quoted By: >>12514691

>>12514392
>Complex numbers don't cause contradictions.
retard hypocrite.
nigger numbers will prevail.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Dec 2020 23:30:08 No.12514691 Report

Quoted By:

>>12514657
>>>/b/

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