[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 62 KB, 800x533, rainbow-full-circle-Colin-Leonhardt-Birdseye-View-Photography-e1498229281151.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11620065 No.11620065 [Reply] [Original]

prove me wrong

>protip: you cant because im literally right.

>> No.11620066

to conduct this experiment i must first eliminate all human observers

>> No.11620070

>>11620066
please so. start with all the people who dont believe in circles.

>> No.11620072

>>11620070
i will be deciding who goes when and how.

>> No.11620075

>>11620066
In the name of science it will be done

>> No.11620078

>>11620075
its happening

>> No.11620087

>>11620072
>t non circle believer

>> No.11620090

>>11620087
?

>> No.11620093

>>11620087
how do intend to prove i dont believe?

>> No.11620100

Rainbows don't exist because our eyes aren't real

>> No.11620105

>>11620065
Why stop at circles?
Your actual statement is, "mathematics is discovered, not invented"
Which is objectively true and only brainlets disagree

>> No.11620112

>>11620105
yes. im glad there is a sane person here.

>> No.11620115

>>11620105
t. brianlet

>> No.11620133

>>11620065
"To exist" isn't even a predicate function.

>> No.11620138

>>11620133
you sound like someone trying extra hard to be smart but you make zero sense.

>> No.11620144

>>11620093
just a feeling i get. you aint from round deez purts.

>> No.11620150

>>11620144
whether or not i am is aside from the fact we would both need to not be able to observe the fact that i believe or not.

>> No.11620192

>>11620138
To make actual sense may not make sense to you. It is a fact that in any mathematical theory, the statement for an object x of the theory that "x exists" is not a predicate. Take it or leave it.

>> No.11620376

>>11620070
how can you not believe in an abstract conception of a simple function? What's not to believe?

>> No.11620410
File: 65 KB, 620x390, LogicalFallacy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11620410

>>11620065

>> No.11620424

>>11620410
lmfao, no, moron.
The burden of proof lies on the person who tries to disprove the claim. A claim is made, and then attempts are made to try to disprove it. If nothing can disprove it, it must be taken as being true.
This is the basis for the scientific method.

>> No.11620448

>>11620424
>If nothing can disprove it, it must be taken as being true.
>This is the basis for the scientific method.
ask me how i know you're not in STEM

>> No.11620458

>>11620448
I have a degree in mathematics and I'm probably smarter than you in terms of raw IQ

>> No.11620463

>>11620410
ok. the sun is a circle and has been around for billions of years before humans existed. therefore it will still be a cirlce once we are gone.

>> No.11620478

>>11620458
I'll have you know, i quadro majored in mathematics, theoretical physics, theoretical comp sci, and theoretical fuck your mother therefore I'm smarter than you in terms of everything, including "raw IQ"
faggot.

>> No.11620479

>>11620458
that is fascinating, how a mathematically illiterate retard can get a degree. what country are you from, sir?

>> No.11620483

>>11620105
Dumb. Math is discovered in an invented spectrum, aka the human spectrum.

>> No.11620491

>>11620424
>>11620448
anon is right and wrong. in mathematics finding a counterexample is sufficient to disprove a proposition. this onus of disproof is employed in cases such as this where all evidence thus far points to the positive.

>> No.11620495

>>11620424
so if someone claimed that red is always red it would fall upon the detractors to prove that sometimes red is blue.

>> No.11620518

>>11620491
>finding a counterexample is sufficient to disprove a proposition
of course, but anon is not making a conjecture but stating a "proof"

>> No.11620537

>>11620065
If human didn't exist then nothing would. Who's going to disagree with that statement, the dirt? God /sci is so dumb

>> No.11620541

>>11620491
That is stupid and circular. To say that all evidence points to the positive is the same as saying that you do not know a counterexample.

>> No.11620547

>>11620537
According to my holy book, God did exist before any human did.

>> No.11620561

>>11620547
where can i read the peer review?

>> No.11620571

>>11620547
Books are written by humans. Before humans, no book. No books, no god.

>> No.11620575

>>11620541
>circular
exactly

>> No.11620585

>>11620571
God told human: write book. Because God cannot write. Paraplegic.

>> No.11620608

>>11620478
Impressive
>>11620479
There is nothing indicative of mathematical illiteracy in any of my posts. Your post id indicative of supreme cope and anger at the prospect that an educated person can disagree with you in epistemology, more evidence of the fact that I am far smarter than you.

>> No.11620629

>>11620575
A human said "circular" about an argument. The argument did not exist before that human (me) did.

>> No.11620639

>>11620608
>A claim is made, and then attempts are made to try to disprove it. If nothing can disprove it, it must be taken as being true.

an invisible, intangible space monster is about to fling an asteroid and destroy the earth unless i fuck your mother like the whore she is in front of you after i castrate and feed you your own genitals and put you on an estrogen diet and give you to somali niggers to rape you daily.

>> No.11620835

>>11620483
Math is discovered because the universe runs off base 1 mathematics.

Humans invented math language, fractions, division, and multiplication, and base 10, simply for our convenience. I wonder how much physics would be different if you removed all the human inventions and just use the basic set of math rules that the universe runs off of.

>> No.11621079

>>11620835
Interesting point. Having a base at all in a number system, regardless of the base, is artificially representing a number as a sum of powers. Nature doesn’t shorthand represent stuff, it just is.

>> No.11621146

>>11620065
When I fucked ur mum her asshole became a circle with circumference dependent on the radius of my huge cock.

QED.

>> No.11621185

>>11621146
oof, ok fair point.

>> No.11623037

>>11620463
The sun is a sphere to leading order approximation

>> No.11623043

>>11621146
A point doesn't really have a radius

>> No.11623969

>>11623043
lel it does tho, it's just infinitely small

>> No.11623978

>>11620065
>made of discrete element
Not a circle

>> No.11624134

>>11623978
What if those discrete elements are circular in nature?

>> No.11624963

>>11624134
Possible, but not a given.