/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15160897
They don't address the fundamental issue with why modern set theory is invalid. First and foremost, the law of logical honesty states that you cannot claim you can do something you cannot do. This means that you cannot claim to do any of these operations with these so-called "infinite sets" because the idea of an set is that you collected some number of objects. You cannot collect an infinite number of things.

I don't know what a "function" is and neither do any mathematicians as they have yet to provide a clear and concise definition of "function" that doesn't rely on all this fantastical nonsense from set theory.

>>15158796
There is nothing beyond the rational numbers in the number line.

It was wrong from the beginning

ZFC is false. Therefore TLT cannot be proven through ZFC

>>15139051
The only person who ever consistently spoke the truth a the royal court was its jester.

>>15140542
Yes

The reals? They aren't real.

>>15117810
real numbers
infinite sets

>>15117297
I would ignore it. Much of the "objects" studied with it are based upon faulty logic like the so-called "axiom" of choice or non-sense like the "axiom" of infinity. That's of course ignoring the intuitive objects found in it like these "infinite sets," and these other strange "constructs"; hierarchies of cardinalities, hierarchies of angels, and then the resulting paradoxes which have still never been resolved. Mathematicians have only hand-waved it away with a meaningless word games and just ignore it. It's common practice for mathematicians to recite the ZFC creed and say the primitive objects prayer whenever problems come up.

>>15111427
This isn't proof. Why? Because there is no reason to assume that arithmetic is well-defined for these infinite decimals or even that this object even exists in any reasonable form. Moreover, the pattern of the listed digits needs to represent the pattern of the digits alleged to exist by "..." as those digits may be calculated by a different algorithm from the the one used to calculate the listed digits or the algorithm used to the generate 0.9999...* just results in the first four digits being 9's while who knows whatever the "rest" of the digits are. Of course, you really can't calculate them all. Second, there is no reason to believe that such the expression 0.9999... actually represents anything meaningful.
>>15113500
>Infinity can be a tough concept to grasp
Infinity is not rigorously defined here and in most circumstances such as this one, it never is well-defined. Moreover, there is no reason to assume
>There is no empty space, only nines
even after multiplying the alleged object as it is entirely unclear whether or not the arithmetic can really be defined given the law of logical honesty. If we're playing this infinity game, then why can't I add 0 to the infinity + 1 slot then and follow the usual rules of arithmetic by 10? There is no reason why I shouldn't be able to from this choice perspective appealed to with these infinite objects. There are an infinite number of digits, but the last one is 0.

>>15069766
Indeed

>>15056994
And his positions are often taken out of context by both his "fans" here and others.

This problem has severe logical issues since it requires the possibility that there are an infinite number of chests contained in an infinite number of chests, all of which are large enough to contain at least one gold bullion. That is completely absurd.

>>15036061
Set theory hasn't proven anything other than how fanciful the imagination of the modern mathematician is.

>>15037559
There are several reasons. First, the notion of a "set" or "collection" is purely intuitive. That is, it's based on being able to collect things or list things. The able to list or collect things being a human action is limited therefore to only finite things. When you assert that there's such a thing as an "infinite set" you're pretending that you can do something that you can't and therefore the result of this logical contradiction are paradoxes. And contrary to what is appealed to when referring to ZFC, these paradoxes still exist and have not been correct since mathematicians like to pretend that introducing another set of undefined words that are even less intuitive than the alleged object which lead to these paradoxes doesn't fix the problem. It's just sophistry. It's utterly meaningless and any definition from such silly word games are therefore meaningless.

First, infinite is a poorly defined notion in Hilbert's Hotel. Second, Hilbert's Hotel assumes that one can perform an infinite number of actions. One cannot perform an infinite number of actions. At the end of the day, talking about a person performing an infinite number of things is just talk and nonsense. You shouldn't take it seriously.

>>14985889
Because solving an expressing using "transcendental" operations or these "real" numbers like taking a square root or sin require that you perform an infinite number of things. You simply cannot perform an infinite number of actions.

>>14965795
A very nice and accurate meme anon.

Post your best /sci/ copypastas. I'll start with:

A liberal jewish sophist schizo and infinitist professor was teaching a class on real analysis (a religion not a science)

"Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Cauchy and accept that he was the greatest mathematician the world has ever known, even greater than Euclid!”

At this moment, a brave, patriotic, finitist who had watched 1500 Wildberger videos on youtube and understood the logical flaws of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory stood up and held up a right-angled isosceles triangle with side length 1.

"What length is the hypotenuse of this triangle?"

The arrogant professor smirked quite Jewishly and smugly replied, "[math] \sqrt{2} [/math], you stupid schizo."

"Wrong. [math] \sqrt{2} [/math] does not exist. If, as you say, it exists... then write down the precise decimal result of [math] \sqrt{2} [/math]!"

The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of Baby Rudin. He stormed out of the room crying those schizo infinitist tears. There is no doubt that our professor, Ezekiel Shekelstein, wished he had critically analyzed the foundations of mathematics and rejected nonsensical notions like infinite sets instead of becoming a schizo infinitist. He wished so much that he could shoot himself, but the bullet would never reach his brain as first it had to cover half the distance, then 2/3, then 3/4 and so on in an unending sequence that he himself had so foolishly proclaimed the existence of!

>>12640289
>>12640295
>>12640299
OH NONONONONO
And the best thing is that mathematicians today can't say shit to this. If they want to assume random schizophrenic bullshit like the axiom of infinity and arbitrary choice functions, then xer is allowed to make "ethnomathematic" axioms including the axiom of gender exchange, where you have to transition to be able to manipulate infinite sets. And infinitist schizos are in no position to disagree, since the only reason they got their axioms accepted was by consensus (aka mass delusion) in the first place.
Looks who's having the last laugh now!

You're in the math club doing some set theory and this guy slaps your fake number system in the ass. What do you do?

>>11559717
>You have to be autistic to think A, in fact, that's what the A stands for.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN "AUTISTIC"?

>>11552069
Yeah. It's called reductio ad absurdum.