/sci/ - Science & Math

>Charismatic
>Warm and good looking
>Non-autistic family man

Is that why people hate him?

>assume infinity exists
>then there is an infinite number of positive integers and something can be done an infinite number of times
>take 1 and put it inside of a box and then take out 1 because it is the square root of 1
>take 2 and put it inside of the box
>take 3 and put it inside of the box
>take 4 and put it inside of the box and then take out 2 because it is the square root of 4
>....
>take n and put it inside of the box and then take out k if it is the square root of n
>do until n = infinity
>each time, you either put a number in the box or you put a number in the box and take one out
>therefore each time you either increase the amount of numbers in the box by 1 or by 0
>for any number, no matter how high, there still exists a chance that it does not have an integer root
>therefore the amount of times the number of numbers in the box increases by 1 is infinity
>therefore after n = infinity there must be infinity numbers in the box
>however every integer is a square root as it can be squared
>therefore there must be 0 numbers in the box
>this is a contradiction
>therefore infinity cannot exist

Why does he hate limits so much?

>>12673538
>A real number is a number that can be assigned a location on the number line.
That doesn't actually mean anything. You are trying to define an arithmetical number system in terms of a geometric object. Therefore, you've just passed the buck of what a real number is to what a "location on the number line" is. And while there are many subtle issues of what this exactly means (as >>12673910 mentions), the more obvious issue is that of avoiding circularity.
How are you going to define a line? If you stick with the usual delusion that a line is an infinite set of points, then what are points? Points today are defined in terms of a number from some base number system (rationals if you are practical and "reals" if you are fanciful). So if you don't change anything else other than your definition of reals, then you're essentially saying "real numbers are locations on the number line and a location on the number is a point specified by a real number." In other words, you haven't actually gotten anywhere.
And, if you leave a point as your undefined object, you're essentially taking the same approach to mathematics that Euclid had 2000 years ago. Introducing coordinates to geometry is really powerful since a lot of Euclid's postulates could now be theorems, since we can precisely define points, lines, etc. in terms of numbers and equations. If you abandon that, you basically lose everything from the 16-17th century onwards in terms of mathematics.
For example, how do you know whether two curves intersect? Today, you'd check to see if there is a point at which they meet, but you haven't actually defined a point so you're basically taking Euclid's approach of just drawing things somewhere and eyeballing.
Therefore, you basically have to "define" a real "number" arithmetically and not geometrically to avoid circularity and maintain a coordinate-based geometry.

In summary, accept your fate and bow down to the cult of the Berger.

>>12521651
Do it.

How can one man inspire such as asspain in infini-tards?

>>12476282
>infinity

>>12422871
aren't you forgetting someone?

so if pi is actually a "number" would u mind writing it down for me?

>>11757209
>

>>11580303
>people too retarded to understand calculus and understand that the 9's are ALREADY THERE. Numbers are not processes.
>ALREADY THERE
Oh really, retard? So you're saying 0.999... is a completed object?
Could you please show me all the 9's in this object again? All of them. Should be easy if they're AlReAdy tHeRE.

would you mind writing down what this number you call "pi" is anon?

>I only believe in numbers I can be bothered counting up to
Please remind me why people take him seriously

Hack or genius?

What are counter arguments to Wildberger? Seems to me he makes a pretty good argument.

Watch this video for a golden kek
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUdFdlQNfpg

Algebraic Geometry.

I do combinatorics, nothing autistic about counting.

I wanna do a Math PhD In Combinatorics so I can transition into industry, is this a good plan? Let me know, guys.

Define "exist."

if there is such a number as "Pi" as you claim, could you please write it down ?

Thank You

>>9855170
>KingCrocoduck (Good 1hr ongoing series about quantum mechanics, a field in which he has a PhD
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiQ2pjcoPI-Jpo1GER7-iUA
>WalterLewin (New physics problems every week. Really smart former proessor)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiEHVhv0SBMpP75JbzJShqw
>PatrickJMT (You can pretty much learn math on this channel alone)
https://www.youtube.com/user/patrickJMT/playlists
>Dr Chris Tisdell (More math)
https://www.youtube.com/user/DrChrisTisdell/videos
>Myles Power (More of a fun channel. More debunking and factoids than hard science/math)
https://www.youtube.com/user/powerm1985/videos
>NileRed (Chemistry with many many "how to make" guides)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFhXFikryT4aFcLkLw2LBLA
>njwildberger (because memes)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXl0Zbk8_rvjyLwAR-Xh9pQ
>Numberphile (Even more memes and the occasional interesting video)
https://www.youtube.com/user/numberphile
>Photonicinduction (Just a madman with a 20,000 watt power supply. Again more entertaining than anything else)
https://www.youtube.com/user/Photonvids/videos
>Rolinychepetin (Electrical engineering. Has some good ongoing guides)
https://www.youtube.com/user/rolinychupetin/videos
>TheJusticar (Gayest man who ever lived but god is he smart. Math vids found in playlists)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeFlOi54kYIgbJHt_1ApDpg
>TheOrganicChemistryTutor (name explains it all)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEWpbFLzoYGPfuWUMFPSaoA
>ViaScience (Amazing relativity and quantum mechanics series in the playlists)
https://www.youtube.com/user/viascience/playlists

>Enjoy!

if there is such a number you call "pi" , could you write it down for me ?