/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21777278]

What is the most profound thing that you’ve ever read?

For me it’s pic related

[Anonymous No.21777292]

How is this profound? It's a natural consequence of e^ix = cos(x) + i*sin(x) which can be derived from looking at the Taylor series of e^x

This is like baby's first math

[Anonymous No.21777302]

why not say e to the i pie equals negative one? does that not have the same gravitas as having it equal zero?

[Anonymous No.21777321]

>>21777292
This, but it is interesting

[Anonymous No.21777439]

>>21777302
Profundity comes by the fact that two numbers can be added to produce zero. Helps that one of them is an exponent which are rarely negative.

[Anonymous No.21777448]

>>21777278
Holy pseud

[Anonymous No.21777458]

Funnily any math topic beyond highschool math is completly useless outside of academia and uni courses

[Anonymous No.21777474]

>>21777458
Cope

[Anonymous No.21777506]

>>21777458
He typed, on a computer

[Anonymous No.21777511]

>>21777458
it always blows my mind when people say this. like you must have no clue about any professional jobs then.

[Anonymous No.21777607]

>>21777458
Yeah too bad teachers are shit and you end up learning at most half that.

[Anonymous No.21778796]

>>21777439
>Profundity comes by the fact that two numbers can be added to produce zero
lmao, check this out:
-x + x = 0
profound

[Anonymous No.21778801]

>>21777458
t. clueless
if you want to stop being that, try reading about risk management, models used in banking, data analysis (clinical trials, ML,...)

[Anonymous No.21778819]

>>21778796
Retard

[Anonymous No.21778829]

>>21778819
yooo check this out, another powerful thing:
(-2)^(2n+1), n natural
the rare negative exponent

[Anonymous No.21778835]

>>21777506
a computer that can solve any math far faster and more reliably than a human.
nobody has done math to build a computer in decades, processors are designed by software

[Anonymous No.21778838]

>>21777278
That's a synthetic a priori judgement like many others, like the pythagorean theorem. Nothing special about it when compared to other judgements of its kind.

[Anonymous No.21778875]

>>21778835
> solve any math
lmao

[Anonymous No.21778885]

>>21778835
I suggest you stop talking about anything technical with only high-school math under your belt, it makes you sound really retarded.

[Anonymous No.21778889]

>>21777292
Everything in math is derived from something pseud-kun. The fact that it comes from taylor series doesn't change the fact that a transcendental number raised to the power of the imaginary unit scaled by a transcendental number is -1, totally changed how we view complex numbers. From just a trick to solve roots, now we see them as a natural extension of the number line to the 2d plane.

[Anonymous No.21778902]

>>21777458
I would say anything beyond sophomore math is useless for most people. You just need Linear Algebra, Probability, Statistics and Calculus with Diff. Eqns and you're sorted

[Anonymous No.21778918]

>>21777278
Samefagging, anon.
When Euler's identity dawned upon me, I nearly sharted my pants and made similar post in I can't recall if /sci/ or /lit/ but no one gave a care.
The platonic cave made sense to me from that day.
Pls tell me what made you to make this post. For me it was some book of Penrose or Boltzmann. Math fascinates me, although I cannot find time for it in day in day out drudgery. Wish I had a bit higher iq for that.
Which books made you think about picrel?

[Anonymous No.21778944]

>>21777278
kek I remember I spent 15 bucks on a book about this identity.

[Anonymous No.21778958]

>>21778918
I once derived the Boltzmann equation in an afternoon on a long walk when my bus didn’t come. Fat lot of good it did me

[Anonymous No.21778991]

>>21778889
Did a simple derivation change your life too, you little brainlet?

[Anonymous No.21778997]

>>21778918
You should read Stein's Complex Analysis

[Anonymous No.21779805]

>>21778835
>nobody has done math to build a computer in decades
lmao

[Anonymous No.21780085]

>>21777278
matter not being the dominating aspect of reality
undoes a lot of knotty feelings in your brain i tell you

[Anonymous No.21780113]

>>21777292
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.21780134]

>>21778835
>this kills the computranny

[Anonymous No.21780312]

>>21777458
Lol

[Anonymous No.21780323]

>>21778838
Absolutely based and actually profound

[Anonymous No.21780413]

Everybody who says this is pseud is a philosophical illiterate

[Anonymous No.21780470]

>>21777278
>to be or not to be

[Anonymous No.21780487]

>>21780085
>punches you in the face

[Anonymous No.21781025]

>>21777292
first thought this was based

>>21778889
then realised this was actually the based opinion

>>21778991
and this looks like nothing but seethe

[Anonymous No.21781039]

>>21777292
when did you learn this? what's your major? what's the highest level of math you took?

[Anonymous No.21781046]

>>21777278
Pic related

[Anonymous No.21781101]

>>21778889
oh wow it really changed how we view some math autism? so it went from just an autistic trick to some other autistic trick which aids in some other autisms? wow truly fascinating hope to really delve into it someday

[Anonymous No.21781110]

>>21781101
Yous /b/ trollin’

[Anonymous No.21781160]

For me it was: A ≠ A

[Anonymous No.21781176]

[Anonymous No.21781885]

>>21778991
>>21781101
Try to look at it this way: the only way to get to Pi number you had to literally measure a circumference, a physical property. Euler's number , e, however is a mathematical constant, related to exponential growth. To find those two in a balanced equation like this is like showing a big 'fuck you' sign in the face of those who insist on 'le world is first and for most physical' and 'le mathematics just a convenient tool'.
This means world is mathematical. I'll let that sink in. Plato was right, sisters.

[Anonymous No.21781894]

>>21781160
I guess if you're missing a chromosome this would make sense

[Anonymous No.21781938]

>>21777278
It’s not profound, it’s contrived.

[Anonymous No.21782256]

>>21781025
Based

[Anonymous No.21782268]

>>21781885

[Anonymous No.21782277]

>>21777458
Electrical engineering uses this type of maths in AC circuits and EM radiation.
Numerical approximation methods, many of which are used by computers, use this maths.

[Anonymous No.21782281]

>>21782277
Electrical engineers don't do this shit by hand though

[Anonymous No.21782294]

>>21777278
It insists upon itself.

[Anonymous No.21782295]

>>21782281
Yes they do for initial design and calculation. Simulations, experimental verification, etc. comes after this first step.
Also, how do you think circuit simulators, EM wave simulators for antennae, etc. compute the values in the first place? Someone had to do it by hand and program it in.

[Anonymous No.21782509]

>>21777278
Within mathematics, category theory and type theory for me can flip between being absolutely mindblowing to being absolutely trivial. One interesting little thing I recently encountered was the fact that you can very naturally encode vertices and matrices within dependent type theory as functions from finite numbers. As a result, all the operators from linear algebra just become familiar combinators and you discover new relations between these operators which are obvious in the context of combinators

[Anonymous No.21782579]

>>21777278
why is this considered beautiful?

[Anonymous No.21782598]

why not just write xy = -1 ? nooo, it has to be xy + 1 = 0 cuz profundity
mathematicians are pseuds

>Whereas painters and musicians are likely to be embarrassed by references to the beauty of their work, mathematicians enjoy discussions of the beauty of mathematics.
t. rota

[Anonymous No.21782643]

>>21782579
Its because of geneology of numbers. There are natural numbers like 1,2,3 fingers, apples etc. From them becomes rational numbers where you use pairs of naturals to make rations. Then there's a lot of linear('simple') functions like sums and products. Using those simple relations ('rules') you can obtain any number except irrationals. They are somehow mystical because you cannot obtain them geneologically, but have to invent whole new concepts to use them. Like root of 2 or the Pi number. Ancient Greeks were assmad about this because squaring the circle was such an seemingly easy problem. It generated a ton of memes although was never solved. From this the idea emerged that 'math is not the whole picture' and 'math is unclean because 'real' measurements had to be made to include those irrational numbers'.
Euler somehow did a trick so exact value of Pi can be introduced into calculus, thus making Pi the essential property of mathematical world , instead of Pi being essential property of geometrical 'real' world.

[Anonymous No.21782664]

>the soiboi e^ipi + 1 = 0

>the midwit e^ipi = -1

>the patrician e^ipi = i^2

[Anonymous No.21782689]

>>21777302
Because having 1 and 0 in the same equation makes it look more deep.

[Anonymous No.21782697]

>>21782598
>>21777302
It is frequent to write things equating to zero, both for esthetics and because it makes some properties look more obvious in topology or in algebraic decomposition. It's also an habit since antiquity and looking at the roots of polynomials (even though they didn't write zero at the time).

[Anonymous No.21782747]

>>21777278
>For me it’s pic related
It LITERALLY means turning a horizontal line by 90 degrees makes it horizontal length zero.
That is 100% of the meaning. Very profound.

[Anonymous No.21782755]

>>21777458
>Funnily any math topic beyond highschool math is completly useless outside of academia and uni courses
My nigger, computers couldn't exist without PhD level mathematics. Without math almost nothing in the modern world would be possible.

[Anonymous No.21782759]

>>21778835
>a computer that can solve any math far faster and more reliably than a human.
Computers are very bad at mathematics.

By the way, mathematics has almost nothing to do with computation.

> nobody has done math to build a computer in decades, processors are designed by software
This is so monumentally wrong...

[Anonymous No.21782766]

>>21782281
A) That is false
B) Computers need to be TOLD what to do
C) Computers are extremely bad at math

[Anonymous No.21782769]

>>21782643
This is such a pile of nonesense.

[Anonymous No.21782788]

>>21782755
And that's a good thing

[Anonymous No.21782791]

>>21782788
It is a fact and as such morally neutral

[Anonymous No.21782803]

>>21777278
Abstract algebra :D

[Anonymous No.21782806]

>>21778835
Melanin enriched individual exposed for never rising above the level where "mathematics" is about computing quantities.

[Anonymous No.21782811]

>>21781160
There is no A to begin with.
Eidetic dogmatism is boom from the get-go

[Anonymous No.21782814]

Anything by Freud, otherwise Ethics by Spinoza or The Brothers Karamazov

[Anonymous No.21782819]

>>21782509
It's sad how little overlap there's been between cat theory and formal linguistics

[Anonymous No.21782835]

>>21782819
Isn't the overlap CS things like CFG or PEG? Those should have algebraic structures you can study.

[Anonymous No.21782932]

Top ten moments I soifaced on intellectual matters, excluding the strictly theological.
>Cauchy's integral/residue theorem
>Augustine's theory of time
>Leibniz sufficient reason
>Duns Scot's univocity of being
>Aquinas's analogy of being
>Cantor's diagonal argument
>Descartes's transcendentalism
>Bolzano's theory of propositions
>Husserl's phenomenological reduction
>Maupertuis least action and related principles
So many others (the core ideas of Lavoisier, Lamarck, Maistre, Peirce, Duhem, Archimedes, etc). It's more like the ten that came up spontaneously.

[Anonymous No.21782939]

>>21777292
I think it's pretty neat, but it's not profound.

[Anonymous No.21782955]

>>21782766
Asking chatGPT simple proofs from Lang Basic Math is always fun, reminds me of my own hardscrabble undergrad days...

[Anonymous No.21782961]

>>21782955
It is just giving you back answers it already knows, its symbol manipulation ability is extremely weak currently.

Try asking it to multiply two large numbers to see how bad it is at abstract reasoning.

[Anonymous No.21782967]

>>21777278
Wittgenstein's finitism

[Anonymous No.21782974]

>>21782961
but the answers are wrong

[Anonymous No.21783006]

>>21782974
>but the answers are wrong
Exactly. It is pure semantic probabilities. It mashes together things which it has seen which are likely to occur together under the given circumstances.

[Anonymous No.21783018]

>>21782643
Chickens and eggs anon

[Anonymous No.21783095]

>>21777278
>when you walk 180° around a unit circle, you end up on the other side
Wow, how profound

[Anonymous No.21783157]

>>21783095
>when you walk 180° around a unit circle, you end up with computers

I'd say

[Anonymous No.21783209]

>>21783095
>>21782747
>>21777292
Meanwhile you phisofags will jerk off to some stupidly obvious quote like:
>Man maketh his own path - Socrates Evola
Wow such profound.

[Anonymous No.21783804]

>>21777278
>profound
is a buzzword
but have some shestov
>https://www.angelfire.com/nb/shestov/dtn/tn_01.html
> In section seven of this essay the reader will find these lines from a private letter of Belinsky’s: "Even if I were able to arrive at the highest degree on the ladder of culture I should not cease to demand of you account for all the victims of the conditions of life and of history, for all the victims of chance, superstition, the inquisition of Philip II, etc.; else I would throw myself head first down the ladder. I do not wish to have happiness for nothing, so long as I am not set at rest about each of those who are my brothers in blood. Disharmony, it is said, is a condition of harmony; it may be that this is very beneficial and amusing for melomaniacs, but not at all for those who are compelled by their fate to incarnate the idea of disharmony."

[Anonymous No.21784975]

>>21783157
A lot of people in this thread can only draw half circles

[Anonymous No.21785003]

>>21783095
A lot of people on this thread can only see half circles

[Anonymous No.21785029]

>>21781160
Everything I learn about this book increases my conviction that it’s just the Tao Te Ching translated into German.

[Anonymous No.21785103]

> And Benjamin Peirce, a 19th-century American philosopher, mathematician, and professor at Harvard University, after proving Euler's identity during a lecture, stated that the identity "is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, but we have proved it, and therefore we know it must be the truth".

[Anonymous No.21785295]

>>21777278
>i
cringe

[Anonymous No.21786944]

>>21777292
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.21787343]

Where are all the cristcucks, neoplatonists, gnostcels ready to split hair on how many demons can dance on top of a pin 24/7?
They are desecrating the Pi, one of building blocks of universe, and yet there's silence.

[Anonymous No.21787563]

>>21785103
Unironically filtered

[Anonymous No.21787649]

>>21783095
Descartes transfiguration of algebraic equation onto a 2 dimensional graph is among the most powerful discoveries in Science.

[Anonymous No.21787764]

>>21777278
"Now this is the commandment, the statutes and the ordinances, which Jehovah your God has commanded me to teach you, that you may do them in the land into which you are crossing over to possess; That you may fear Jehovah your God and keep all His statutes and His commandments, which I am commanding you, you and your son and your grandson, all the days of your life; and that your days may be extended. Therefore hear, O Israel, and be certain to do it, that it may go well with you and that you may be greatly increased, in a land flowing with milk and honey, even as Jehovah, the God of your fathers, promised you. Hear, O Israel, Jehovah is our God; Jehovah is one. And you shall love Jehovah your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words, which I command you today, shall be upon your heart; And you shall repeat them to your children, and speak about them when you sit in your house and when you journey on the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up; And you shall bind them on your hand as a sign, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes; And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. And when Jehovah your God brings you into the land which He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give you great and fine cities that you did not build, And houses full of every good thing that you did not fill, and hewn cisterns that you did not hew, vineyards and olive groves that you did not plant, and you have eaten and are satisfied; Be careful that you do not forget Jehovah, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the slave house. It is Jehovah your God whom you shall fear, and Him whom you shall serve; and it is by His name only that you shall swear. You shall not go after other gods, any of the gods of the peoples who surround you — For Jehovah your God is a jealous God in the midst of you. Otherwise the anger of Jehovah your God will be kindled against you, and He will destroy you from off the face of the earth." (Deuteronomy 6:1-15)

[Anonymous No.21787872]

>>21777292
I contains every fundamental math constant fr

[Anonymous No.21787904]

>>21777278
>What is the most profound thing that you’ve ever read
Bronze age minset by bronze age pervert

[Anonymous No.21787925]

>>21777506
This is clearly an argument in favour for burning every math book in existance

[Anonymous No.21787951]

>>21781160
Hegel was a retarded hack, see schopenhauer(pbuh)

[Anonymous No.21788025]

>>21777458
Dass rite, boy. You don't need white math for running OnlyFans or being a Chief Diversity Officer.
Preach it, brother!

[Anonymous No.21788062]

>>21788025
Nuclear war really is the only answer fr

[Anonymous No.21788068]

>>21788025
Once again spic nig cycle reasserts itself

[Anonymous No.21788280]

>>21777292
>It's a natural consequence of e^ix = cos(x) + i*sin(x) which can be derived from looking at the Taylor series of e^x
With mathematical maturity you will learn to appreciate just how important this formula is.
Complex analysis, hence harmonic analysis and complex geometry, number theory (a lot of analytic number theory depends on complex analysis) theoretical physics, abstract algebra, the theory of distributions (think Dirac's exponential definition of his delta function), even electrical engineering all depend on the complex exponential. Your attempt to trivialise this discovery just shows how much you have yet to learn.
>>21777278
196,884 = 196,883 + 1
Now that's a profound formula!

[Anonymous No.21788321]

>>21777292
except it's not baby's first math.. when most people are introduced to the unit i in a high school pre calculus class, none of this obvious or even attempted to be taught.. and most people never take calculus, let alone calc 2, when taylor series are actually learned and able to be contextualized.
the only person you're belittling is yourself.

[Anonymous No.21788337]

>>21777278
>how interesting it is to see people welcoming you into their midst so eagerly, accepting you, flocking to you. why is it, do you suppose? they do plenty of snubbing on their own, but just let someone who's snubbed them all her life suddenly break down and turn gregarious -- and they'll all come rolling on their backs with their paws folded, for you to rub their bellies. why? there could be two explanations, i think. the nice one would be that they are generous and wish to honor you with their friendship. only the nice explanations are never the true ones. the other is that they know you're degrading yourself by needing them, you're coming down off a pinnacle -- every loneliness is a pinnacle -- and they're delighted to drag you down through their friendship.

[Anonymous No.21788345]

>>21781885
but pi is not a physical quantity? there is no perfect circle or sphere in existence that we know of.. and e is never observed in nature either, because no growth rate is ever perfectly directly proportional to just a constant

[Anonymous No.21788367]

>>21787563
Guaranteed he's smarter and has contributed much more than you, faggot.

[Anonymous No.21788472]

>>21788345
>but pi is not a physical quantity? there is no perfect circle or sphere in existence that we know of
Physicists use pi all the time, even if a perfect circle is just an idealisation.
For example, there are lots of QFT textbooks that start by saying something like "we ignore factors of 2pi", because pi, or more often 2pi, comes up so often, and it's just as a multiplicative constant, so people overlook it.

[Anonymous No.21788512]

>>21782747
Seeing profundity in simple things is a better strategy than being a cynic.
How does math keep doing that thing where it's internally consistent no matter how you approach it?
How is the average of a set a numbers stored? How can we reliably extract an average it if it doesn't exist already?
Cynicism about these kinds of childish questions reinforces your established worldview and prevents it from expanding. You end up accepting that these things "just are" which is a productive strategy when actually doing math but not for thinking about what math is.

[Anonymous No.21788617]

>>21788472
wrong

[Anonymous No.21788742]

>>21788617
elaborate

[Anonymous No.21788762]

>What is the most profound thing that you’ve ever read?

>For me it’s pic related

SCIENCE b*tch

[Anonymous No.21788816]

>>21788762
Mathematics is not to be conflated with empirical science, and certainly not the "science" that basedboys are into. There is no "TRUST THE EXPERTS" in maths, you can follow the logic and play with it yourself.

[Anonymous No.21788825]

>>21781894
He (>>21781160) is you but from the further.

[Anonymous No.21788832]

>>21788742
idk i'm not a physicist

[Anonymous No.21788834]

>>21788512
>How is the average of a set a numbers stored? How can we reliably extract an average it if it doesn't exist already?
does this have something to do with the properties of metric spaces? sorry im undergrad retard

[Anonymous No.21789009]

>>21782932
>>Cauchy's integral/residue theorem
>>Augustine's theory of time
>>Aquinas's analogy of being
>>Bolzano's theory of propositions
Elaborate on these please.

[Anonymous No.21789403]

>>21778801
No, IMMENSE faggot subhuman.

[Anonymous No.21789624]

>>21782509
The purpose of category theory is "to show that which is trivial is trivially trivial".
(Freyd)

[Anonymous No.21790292]

>>21789624
It's been 60 years that the dedicated fanbase has been yelling it's the ultimate in mathematics. I don't want to disrespect, but the initial enthusiasm (rarely from the big category theorists) about how it will completely transform philosophy and every reasoning will be recast in category theory has proven to be futile. It's a neat area for expressing autism, it won't change philosophy.

[Anonymous No.21790315]

>>21782509
where can i learn more about this?

[Anonymous No.21790406]

>>21777278
Probably Meditations on Moloch or The Sequences
Kind of turned the way I think about the world on its side