/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14311246

59KiB, 620x562, monkey thinking about natural numbers and the mistakes of set theory.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

If a number can't be written in any way

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 13:39:13 2022 No.14311246 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14311281 >>14311429 >>14311522 >>14313722

Not even using the most advanced possible computer you can imagine, or using all atoms in the universe, does it really exist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WabHm1QWVCA

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 13:41:14 No.14311249 Report

Quoted By: >>14311270

ok monkey

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 13:55:59 No.14311270 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311249
who are you calling a monkey, chimp?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 13:59:51 No.14311275 Report

Quoted By: >>14311297

here I'll write out the biggest number you can possibly imagine
>the biggest number you can possibly imagine

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 14:04:53 No.14311281 Report

Quoted By: >>14311305

>>14311246
It's a number, do numbers exist at all? What about words? Words are intangible, they are vibrations in the air or we may represent the phonemes through letters, but the various printed and handwritten variations aren't the word themselves... so does the word exist?
You know what? WHY THE FUCK DO YOU WASTE YOU FUCKING MONKEY BRAIN ON ONTOLOGICAL PEDANTRY!?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 14:19:25 No.14311297 Report

Quoted By: >>14311368 >>14311526

>>14311275
English is not Mathematics
you can say you have a triangle square, doesn't make it true

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 14:23:37 No.14311305 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311281
>You know what? WHY THE FUCK DO YOU WASTE YOU FUCKING MONKEY BRAIN ON ONTOLOGICAL PEDANTRY!?
https://youtu.be/5cFvwT6gHns?t=105

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 14:57:54 No.14311368 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311297
>he doesnt project a square from the face of a sphere to the triangle in the plane
try learning more first, loser

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 66435.png, 31KiB, 614x614

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:23:20 No.14311429 Report

Quoted By: >>14311434 >>14311446

>>14311246
I don't think there's a limit to how large a number you can describe. Too big to write down directly? Use the up-arrow notation. So big that even the parameters for the up-arrow notation don't fit? Use nested up-arrow notation. So big even a hierarchy of nested up-arrow notations won't cut it? Create a new abstraction that represents up-arrow-notation levels of up-arrow-notation-nesting etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:25:54 No.14311434 Report

Quoted By: >>14311445 >>14311506

>>14311429
but then you have to admit that math has nothing to do with reality though if it can't be computed by anything in the known universe

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:30:36 No.14311445 Report

Quoted By: >>14311465

>>14311434
nta but yes math doesn't have to do anything with the universe. That is something people who don't really know mathematics came up with.
It's just so happens that math can be used to make predictions/models about reality etc. by establishing some laws or whatever they call them.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO a19466894e31fd74.jpg, 100KiB, 1080x1080

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:31:14 No.14311446 Report

Quoted By: >>14311470 >>14311473

>>14311429
Rayo's Number will BTFO anything you can do with any kind of a nested system of Knuth notation. It's so big it's probably completely impossible to beat it without using the same exact idea and just putting a bigger number as the base.

In case you don't know, Rayo's Number means "the first integer larger than anything you can define using 10^100 symbols in first-order set theory"
and no matter what the fuck you try to do, without using the same idea, you can't go larger than that

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:37:47 No.14311465 Report

Quoted By: >>14311494 >>14312011

>>14311445
>nta but yes math doesn't have to do anything with the universe. That is something people who don't really know mathematics came up with.
>It's just so happens that math can be used to make predictions/models about reality etc. by establishing some laws or whatever they call them.
what if the maths that is applicable to reality is the only true maths (since something be true means corresponding to the facts of reality) and all the rest of mathematics are just random nonsense that for some reason human brains came up with like monkeys typing ad infinitum?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:39:25 No.14311470 Report

Quoted By: >>14311552

>>14311446
what about rayo's number + 1

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:42:54 No.14311473 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311446
That's kinda besides the point. What I'm saying is that it seems like you can always find some way to "compress" a number using levels of indirection. On the other hand, it also seems like you SHOULD run out of "space" to describe your hierarchy of descriptions, so maybe there is an upper limit after all. I don't know. Can't figure it out. It seems like there may even be "gaps" such that some numbers are too big to describe, but bigger numbers coalesce into a manageable description.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 15:56:34 No.14311494 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311465
>what if the maths that is applicable to reality is the only true maths
I don't think there is such thing as "applicable maths". Every field of mathematics could have applications. I guess a better way to categorize them is math fields for which we have already found applications.
>the rest of mathematics are just random nonsense that for some reason human brains came up with like monkeys typing ad infinitum
That seems about right. The reality is most maths don't have any direct application right now, and a huge chunk of those possibly never will.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 16:02:37 No.14311506 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311434
>but then you have to admit that math has nothing to do with reality though if it can't be computed by anything in the known universe
I'm not sure. Those "too-large numbers" would correspond to smaller numbers that encode them and fit inside the universe, so in a sense, they would be the same information in different forms.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 52234234.jpg, 38KiB, 662x712

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 16:09:35 No.14311522 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311246
So I've thought about OP's question for a bit, and here's my conclusion: descriptions for numbers larger than the number of elements in the universe are themselves numbers that fit inside the universe, and numbers that can't be described in any way don't exist in any meaningful way, not even abstractly. I've always thought finitists were retarded pedants, but fuck me, seems like they have a point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 16:12:46 No.14311526 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311297
I have triangle square fried to circle squares fettering six 3's. The preceding statement is true as supported by the principle of explosion

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 9cp9c.jpg, 57KiB, 640x640

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 16:25:16 No.14311552 Report

Quoted By: >>14311567

>>14311470
Well you just Rayo's number for defining your "Rayo's Number +1". Now try using a novel idea instead - can't do that I bet!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 16:31:48 No.14311567 Report

Quoted By: >>14311655

>>14311552
I present to you, Gayo's number: the first integer larger than anything you can define using the first integer larger than anything you can define using 10^200 symbols in first-order set theory symbols in first-order set theory.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 17:05:10 No.14311655 Report

Quoted By: >>14311667

>>14311567
That's bigger, but again you use the same idea just with a larger base number. Of course you can go bigger by just saying "Rayo's Number but instead of 10^100 we use Rayo's Number and repeat this nest a Rayo's Number of times xD" but now try doing this without invoking the idea of the number. Anything you can think of will be smaller

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 17:09:03 No.14311667 Report

Quoted By: >>14311674

>>14311655
>you use the same idea just with a larger base number
No, the description has a different logical structure. But even if I accept your objection, it's still trivially easy to do better than Rayo and his gay little number. Here:
>smallest integer that, barring this description, cannot be described using 100 GB of data.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 29939b5b5529c709.jpg, 1MiB, 3036x3254

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 17:10:45 No.14311674 Report

Quoted By: >>14311699

>>14311667
That's a big fucking number alright and your idea is new. I tip my fedora to you

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 235234.jpg, 46KiB, 460x622

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 17:24:58 No.14311699 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311674
>someone accepted a counter-argument on /sci/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Mar 2022 19:27:56 No.14312011 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311465
The thing is that plenty of mathematics that seemed like it had no relation to the real world or practical usage when it was first created ends up finding a real world use later on. For example, the concept of prime numbers was developed by the ancient Greeks, and spent a couple thousand years being developed refined by mathematicians throughout the ages before anyone found something useful to do with them: public key cryptography. When the idea of imaginary numbers was developed, it was mocked, even in the name, yet they turned out to be useful for electrical circuit design centuries later.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Mar 2022 08:52:25 No.14313722 Report

Quoted By:

>>14311246
A number is completely independent from any representation of that number. For sufficiently large n, n! will have more digits than there are atoms in the universe, but n! is no less real and no less useful than any other number,.

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