/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16054734
Pythagoras' theorem only applies to triangles that exist. Unfortunately, though one would like to believe there is such a triangle with sides of equal length, there is no reason to believe such a triangle actual exists. There is no number which solves x^2 = 2. A sequence nor some fantasy concoction such as a Dedekind cut is not a number nor is there any rigorous logical foundation for either--just wishful thinking on the part of modern mathematicians. The only thing you can do is introduce an algebraic placeholder much like one does with i for i^2 = -1 for the purpose of abstract algebra or look for a logically sound object like a matrix to represent it.

I'm putting together a team.

>>9615819
Rat/Int

>>9319887
>Virgin Terry A. Davis
>wastes a decade to write useless ancient-looking OS, no one knows or cares
>schizo neet, does nothing but stream and shitpost all day
>internet stalks a coalburner, finally loses virginity to a crack whore with AIDS
>gets his life fucked up even more than usual by /g/, currently under arrest warrant for punching the only people to care about him into a coma

>CHAD NORMAN J. WILDBERGER
>reinvents the entire field of mathematics, leaves everyone baffled by his insights
>associate professor in reputable university, has enlightened thousands of students as well as viewers from around the world
>happily married with a daughter
>online shitposting has no effect on him, brushes away the cries of brainlets that don't understand his thinking with his smug visage and acerbic wit

>>9247646
>infinite sets

>>9138242

What's his best videos?

>used to think the real numbers were well-defined

>angles

He will prove the ABC conjecture and then pic related will find a gap in his proof because of his unfounded and weak foundations used in said proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_q_DtxaMYg

oh, this guy..

>>7475630
>mfw followers of the real number dogma measure distances in front of me
>mfw they don't even know of the triple quad theorem

>>7393951
>calculations for the moon landing
The other poster was talking about a nuclear reactor in his town though.
Maybe all calculations for designing and building that reactor were made with slide rules and you're right, but your example has nothing to do with my post.

>>7393954
You're right about this, I forgot that most handheld calculators use BCD internally. My wrong.

>>7394069
>yet I don't see anyone calling for the dropping the reals for the rationals.
Are you that new on /sci/? Pic related.
>Building a point just because computers use it is meaningless, because the way computers do things for us is meaningless.
I never said that base 2 is the best base, I was just replying to the other poster who said that ALL math used to build the nuclear reactor in his town was done in base 10.

I see this guy posted a lot and I know he holds some controversial views on maths. What exactly does he believe that is so upsetting to you guys?

>implying infinity exists
numerology belongs on >>>/x/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nAgDNz6ETQ

Two videos in one week. Where as God rested on Sunday, Norman Wildberger brings us another great video!

Our God speaks again!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMWEiPuFhBQ

Our god has finally spoken once again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rjxOFAzBa4

LGTSS
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXl0Zbk8_rvjyLwAR-Xh9pQ

Norman Wildberger's Youtube channel would be quite cool if he wasn't such a nutjob.

Are there any similar channels like Wildberger's on Youtube, i.e. where a prof talks about maths, without the "muh finitism"? And I don't mean just lectures.

Why do you embrace Cantorian pseudomathematics?