/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11254940
Fuck off back to >>/pol/

>>>/lit/

>>11254940
>>11254941
>>11254946
>infinitely deep
in your mom.

>>11254940
We’re sitting on a plank’s length chessboard growing more and more but studying the infinite potential states of our universe isn’t a fallacy.
Just learn the concept of aleph numbers and how it can describe our world. It’s more than just a math thing

>>11254940
What thing are you speaking of when you say "infinity"? The symbol [math]\infty[/math] exists, doesn't it?

What do you mean by "exist"? The statement [math] \exists x : x = \infty [/math]$ is only a proposition if [math] \infty [/math] is defined in the first place. Such as in whatever treatment of finite elliptic curves that defines [math]\infty[/math] as the neutral element of the associated finite group. And then it would be a true proposition, trivially.

>>11254940
>Infinity doesn't exist. It's an illusion, logical fallacy. There's no such thing as "infinity" in the physical world. Infinity is an inapplicable term since concepts of existence have nothing to do with the idea of endlessness in the end since the concept of infinity is devoid of any transcendental content

100% provably false try again brainlet

Infinity is the supremum of the reals

>>11255156
This.

One has be clear about the difference between infinity and "infinite". One is an abstract element and the other is a condition of sets equivalent to:
There exists an injective function into a proper subset if itself.

>>11254948
Duck my infinite dick

>>11254940
infinite literally means not finite. You're quite retarded.

>>11255156
> Infinity is the supremum of the reals
Well, that is only if you take supremum in the extended set [math]\mathbb{R} \cup \{\infty\}[/math] of reals. Otherwise the supremum does not exist. So you are cheating.

>>11257261
Don't waste your time with him. Low-IQ people think arguing about semantics of well-established subjects is the way to come across as intelligent.

>>11257261
It's not cheating to define a term before using it. It's the only helpful way to do things.

I tend to agree with you but how would you prove it otherwise?

All human observations and measurements are finite. There is no way to measure an infinite object using finite measures.

Secondly, the possibility of particles exhibiting fractal-like depth doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me. So perhaps that's another way infinity might be expressed in the physical world.

Also, there are many analogies between the speed of light and infinity. Perhaps the speed of light is infinite under some kind of gauge transformation. Perhaps there is a relativity of finite and infinite?

>>11257258
> infinite literally means not finite. You're quite retarded.
What does finite mean, huh? Not infinite? I can explain what the OP means (I am not OP). What he thinks is that the numbers go up 1,2,...,N and they stop there. These are the finite numbers. What he says is that if you take the numbers 0,1,2,...,N, then there is one more number 0 in the mix. This means that now there are infinitely many numbers, i.e. there are more numbers than the actual numbers. And also you cannot count the numbers 0,1,2,...,N, because there are more of them than you can count, so their totality is not only infinite but also uncountable.
I am sure that the OP will appreciate my help in explaining what he means.

>infinity doesn't exist
pick a direction away from this board and keep walking forever. that's infinity

>>11257266
Yeah, because Humpty-Dumpty was really high IQ and cared precisely as much about semantics as you do.

>>11257261
Infinity is the supremum of the reals, are you high? The supremum of a set doesn't have to be in the set.

>>11257343
Define supremum then.

Thank you Ramsey intimidator blockers.

>>11257346
Least upper bound. The supremum of [math]\{x\in \mathbb{Q} : x^2 < 2\}[/math] is the square root of two, which isn't a rational number

>>11254940
>this finite universe isn't actually infinite. Ignore all other types of infinity that would make me look stupid.
A thread died for this.

>>11257352
Only if you consider it as a subset of R. Otherwise, the supremum does not exist.

I get to decide the new calendar format. And a few other goodies.

1/infinity = 0, 0*infinity= 0,???

>>11257365
By definition the rationals are a subset of the reals, have you ever even taken an analysis course? Am I just arguing with a retard?

>>11257381
A supremum is always defined relatively to a bigger a set. That set does not have a supremum as a subset of Q. As a subset of R, its supremum is the square root of 2.
Are you in HS perhaps ?

>>11257387
No, I'm in a complex analysis course right now

>>11257393
That's extremely sad.

>>11254940
No argument in that entire post, pathetic.

>>11257381
>By definition the rationals are a subset of the reals
What definition?

>>11255156
You have to take the one point compactification of the reals first. Then a symbol which we may as well call infinity will manifest.

>>11257805
Any standard defitinition of the reals constructs them as a completion of the rationals, which by definition (maybe not by definition, but it follows so trivially that you may as well say it is so), means they are contained as a dense sunset.

>>11257275
The speed of light is c, but the rapidity of light is infinite.

Infinity doesn't need to be a quantity, you pleb.
Also of course there is no infinity in the physical world, some things are just very much correlated with infinity.
Infinitely small things do however exist, refer to electrons

infinitely deep in ur mom btw

>>11257427
people could really stand to benefit from introductory logic

>>11254940
>>>biz

>let x be a structured set upon which any defined operation on it will lead to another, unique element in that set

how can this not exist? there is no contraditction

>>11254985
if the universe is finite then the number of its potential states are also finite.

>>11254940
>"Infinite" is a non-mental concept

tfw can only conceive of non-mental concepts

>>11257934
then why is it allowing me to imagine infinite sets?

>>11254940
It does exist. Time is infite. Both ways.