/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15044807
>If you're relying then on geometric constructions to assert this, the reality is that you're off 0.000001 cm from the ends of each line segment and you actually drew a rational length and don't realize it.

No the fact is the "magnitude", the device used to construct DOES NOT CHANGE WHATSOEVER. It is "itself". Math? Math uses silly symbols "undefined" and decimals that expand infinitely as a coping mechanism for being unable to actually quantify it. It the most "accurate description" you're going to get, but even then you're right. It's constructing an idealism that "doesn't exist".

>>15044836
Yeah lets just write down symbols and forget what they mean. In fact lets just shit all over math: the language of quantification and add all sorts of expressions and meaningless woo to complicate what "number" means and refers to.Bbecause we're materialists anyway right? Yeah it must not exist unless it can be described using standardized units and probing devices.

>>15012391
>there is no apocalypse because I quantitatively can't see a white horse
>*gets his wealth reaped over the course of 2 years with no end in sight, holodomor is his future because he took the analogy of the cyclical nature of society too literal and is actually waiting to see a horsemen to believe it.
>"T-The bible does not talk about my modern day materialistic terms for quantity!"

>>15001972
>you can consistently measure it with an accelerometer

Measure what? What is "it" that you're measuring?
>acceleration: the measurement of rate of change of the velocity an object
or:
>acceleration: "the object" that has never been experimentally shown to exist.
or something else? What is the thing that you are measuring and calling "physical"?

>It's not subjective.
It's a tool you retard. What it's measuring and calling "measure" is subjective. That's what measurements "are" dummy. Subjective. Made up. They don't actually exist as objects for you to accurately describe, your accurate description is the reification of the measure.

>>14972855
>The situation is kind of the opposite.
It really isn't. Wake up.
>Which poses a problem. How, then, do you determine what the actual case is beyond your mere assertion of it?
Just take off the mask. Just go back to your normal life. It's really that simple.

>And on what basis do you determine it is "fake shit"?
What basis do I trust their unproven fake shit? How about this inste3ad:

1. Shut the fuck up about anything covid related
2. People stop investing their mental energy into some demented magical tulpa particle that defies logic because of what some heavily sued pharmaceutical company said.
3. You go back to your era of abundance and prosperity where there are no manufactured shortages of supplies because you all stopped believing and wasting your time and energy into geomancing and making offerings to the reified tulpa.

I'm sure if that actually happened, we wouldn't even care if the book learned retards who carried out the psychosis never admitted they lied. Too bad that's never going to happen because you have a statistic to quote me to say otherwise.

>>14957869
Tell me what number it is, I dare you.

>>14870344
>Q: What cause the big bang?
>A:IDK but I'm going to talk about everything outside the universe I don't know about
Hows the therapy going?

>>14870373
>Your conclusion of naturalism is numerically, logically, and physically inferior to design.
Okay, materialist. Please explain what numbers have to do with nature?

>>14870385
There is only an "outside" if you treat the subject spoken of like a object to be peddled on a street corner to crackpots.

>>14870412
>chemicals turning into life thing
Yeah, how do they do that?

>>14839375
>oh, you're just a contrarian
No, it's just that when you write
>[SYMBOL]
>[EXPRESSION]
>placeholder for [NO QUANTITY]

it still doesn't make it a quantity. How the fuck am I supposed to do math when I don't have a fucking quantity to work with? I bet you don't even want to think about that because it means dwelling into the realms of philosophical explanations (because there's no fucking quantity to apply math to for a mathematical explanation).

>>14826646
>Obviously they existed since unlike aether, they have been observed.
>Love doesn't exist

>Unrefutable proof that aetherfaggotry is mental illness.
You have no proof of this magical place that doesn't exist. You can't put space in an experiment, it has no properties to be tested (or falsified). You're left with "Distance: the measurement", which still doesn't make it the "thing that is measured". Likewise with time. Time is your standardized measurement used for comparing things that actually do exist, it's a tool for your experiments in the first place. You can't just reify it as a real phenomena/modality/"thing"/object to be put into an experiment. Well you could, but that would make you certifiably retarded as it would be contradictory to even performing an experiment with a time
Combining the two into a fancy description/model is never going to explain shit, it is also never going to make what is allegedly being modeled come into existence. Both space and time are not objects to be discussed in the first place, but that doesn't stop schizo pop-sci weenies from talking about them endlessly.

>"Dude space just curves bro, and I can't even explain how"
Cool story bro. I'm not even going to contend it because it's an accurately described imagination. What meaning it has? Who cares? You probably couldn't explain that either could you?

>"Light has a speed bruh, I swear on my diploma that would be completely worthless were there not actually any evidence for it"
Why of course you would. But you're never actually going to show me proof of it because...well your diploma would be fucking worthless since a large portion of physics is based on this psychosis. You have to believe in "c" because at this point relativity is nothing but a belief system. "c" is basically your original sin.

>>14760724
>>14760730
>>14760734
>>14760737
>>14760746
>>14760752
>Show me your soul
>When your viewpoint on reality is so backwards and materialistic that you believe the concept of soul is also supposed to be material

You are the mundane. Doomed to walk right off a cliff because the map you're using doesn't have the drop off illustrated for you when you could have just looked straight ahead.

>>14760759
Who is the troll? I personally think it's the guy asking for physical proof of a soul (imagine).

>>14713443
>>14713480
>If I just ad hominem myself I can distract from the fact that none of this shit, math or otherwise actually explains anything.

No one said anything about your crooked teeth other than you, Nigel.

>>14713490
>He posted the numbers card!

Typical mathematician. What you don't have is an explanation. Tell us what the numbers mea

>>14668686
>What's the reason for the need of a computational trick or device?
To count more
>Because 'something' is phsycislly there that needs labeling?
Maybe maybe not, it needs labeling in order to be counted though. Otherwise physics could not be applied to it.


>>14658213
>Just because you can't measure something does not mean it has no mesurement.
Measuring a shadow doesn't make it real.

>>14506843
>This is not a number. It is an operator
It's an expression.

>>14506845
And yet I see no quantity.

>>14506856
>You are probably confusing number with quantity,
Pi is neither and what you said has no relevance.

>>14506889
>number
No
>ratio
No, "irrational". Which is also why it's not a number.

>>14506912
They exist but can't be described using math.

How come they are not studying the following?
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-combining/
https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/doctrine

>>12713161
That one?

>>12110109
>>12110148

So I can use memory palace to memorize lists but what do I use to memorize meaning/why something does something. Example: Why is the sky blue or Why do certain molecules bond in different ways?

What technique would you use here?

>>11873083
kekkers, pic related needs this

Why are most programmers like this?