/sci/ - Science & Math

1 "If it is after three, it is not much after three."
2 "If it is much after three, it is not after three."

If so, why is the first one something a normal person might say but the second one nonsensical?

What branch of mathematics should I study to learn how to write a sequel to Despacito? I tried searching Terry Tao's blog but didn't find anything.

The Piraha people do not have numbers, and the notion of the actual infinity of all numbers is a product of human imagination; the story is simply made up. The tale of ω even has the structure of the traditional fairy tale: "Once upon a time there was a number called 0. It had a successor, which in turn had a successor, and all the successors had successors happily ever after."

Some mathematicians, the fundamentalists, believe in the literal inerrancy of the tale, while others, the formalists, do not. When mathematicians are doing mathematics, as opposed to talking about mathematics, it makes no difference: the theorems and proofs of the ones are indistinguishable from those of the others. Let us examine the fundamentalist belief in the existence of the completed infinity ω in the light of monotheistic faith. It is part of monotheistic faith, as I understand it, that everything in creation is contingent; I AM WHO I AM is not constrained by necessity. Are we to believe that ω is contingent, that the truths of arithmetic might have been different had it pleased God to make them so? Or are we to believe that ω is uncreated—existing in its infinite magnitude by necessity, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be? But these are unreal questions, like “can aleph-2 angels dance on the head of a pin?”

It is possible to doubt the consistency of Peano Arithmetic, because of the untamed power of induction -- the Inductive Hypothesis can be quite complicated, making it possible that an inconsistency may creap in.

Many greetings, with deep respect to your excellencies, as is my duty in writing to your excellencies. Most worthy Mathematicians, you must know that there is a most important question, in regard to which I desire and beseech an answer from your excellencies.

My question is: Is it possible to have a field K that is contained in the real numbers, but is not Lebesgue measurable?

Take it not evil of me that I ask such questions, for I do it for my instruction. Farewell.

Trying to do this geometry puzzle.

Let L be a finite set of lines in the plane, such that no two lines are parallel. If each line is colored red or blue, then there is a point where at least two lines intersect, and all lines through that point have the same color.

One day, you are talking to your friends about your favorite mathematician, Leohnard Euler. Your friends say that even if Euler had not died in 1783, he would still be dead today. You take the contra-positive, and conclude that if Euler were alive today, he would have died in 1783. Your friends say that this makes no sense. After a heated discussion, you lost track of the time and wonder what time it is. Your friends say "If it is after two o'clock, it is not much after two o'clock." You take the contrapositive, and conclude that if it is much after two o'clock, it is not after two o'clock at all, a clear contradiction!

Is all of logic/math invalid? If not, why cannot we apply contraposition in this case?

>>9417164
why the homophobia?
am I doing this right? this is the latest meme, right? i am not good with computer.