/sci/ - Science & Math

Often men with yellow fever are omega males that do not even possess possibility to white women.


The science is this: white women are reserved to the use of best white men.

>>12701062
>Under ZFC, the first infinite set that is assumed

Ias she a real deal or some kind of a joke?

Ok, we may be deterministic, but our brain has so many neurons and their interconnections so 5 minutes of its process gives so many possibilities its approximately infinite therefore approximately indeterministic.

>>12664007
delusional.

>>12665563
>sqrt of 2 beeing irrational just means you cannot measure the side and the diagonal of a square with the same unit.
No, that just means that length is a property that only some line segments have. In fact, if someone tells you to do something (e.g. get a line segment of length sqrt(2)) that requires an infinite amount of work to accomplish, that probably means that the task is impossible, so talking about the completion of the task ("the actual number sqrt(2)") is nonsensical. You can get as close as you want to the "true value" but the only thing you will ever have is the approximation, not the number sqrt(2) itself. The only reason you think it is a number in the first place is because ZFC assumes by fiat the ability to do an infinite amount of work (lol).

>>12665575
that's not his argument and you clearly haven't actually listened to what he said, but whatever makes you feel better. let me know what pi + e (exactly, not approximately) is without:
1)writing pi + e
2)writing some digits and then ending with some dots
3)telling me to go do an infinite amount of work (e.g. add this infinite sequence of rationals)
And if you say that you have an algorithm that can get you arbitrarily close to "pi + e" (assuming that's even a number in the first place), consider the fact that since all you can give me are approximations to "pi + e", then that's all that there really is; things like "pi" are inherently approximate quantities (and not actual concrete things like rational numbers).
>inb4 what about 1/3 = 0.(3)
The point is that I can convert from repeating decimals to rational numbers and do all my arithmetic there. So there is a representation that allows me to work with repeating decimals that can give me exact results in a finite amount of time. The same can't be said of """real""" numbers.

>>12640595
On a scale from 1-10, how mad are you right now?

>>12631355
Who is gonna post the gower's cope this time around? It gets sadder each time someone posts it.

>>12519178
alarmingly based

>>12513515
>implying chadburger gives even a single shit about """cantor"""'s schizo rantings.