Redpill me on Inter-Universal Theory. Is it just a meme?

>Redpill me

>is _____ a meme?

>>8650784
hold on i'ma have to use my /x/man powers and channel him.

>>8650784

Uh... barely a handful of people on the planet have a basic understanding of it. You won't find any of those people on /sci/. You'll probably never understand it in your lifetime. Is that a good enough red pill for you?

i'm reading his papers right now

>>8650809
OH SHIT I remember these vitamins, they were THE SHIT.

>T-Thanks for not making me a brainlet kid

>>8650807
>have a basic understanding of it

Nah. There is no subject on Earth which cannot be formulated simply with few sentences in the English language (and multiple other languages). Stupid people just concede and say that things are too complicated; it's not. Basics of any subject are very available to almost all intelligent people.

So, basics of Inter-Universal theory are the following:
>it has alternative number system based on elliptic sequence
>the number system is used to define a set system
>number system and set system together attempt to give a new way to express certain objects and events
>UTILITY: Our arithmetic geometry can't express certain objects and events. IUT might.
>WHAT HAPPENS NEXT: The theory has a working group and is being reviewed and editorialized. So far so good.

There you go.

>>8650892
if English language is a formal system with rules
then there are limits.

>>8650898
Incorrect. You are just brainlessly repeating some mathematicians theory (is that Gödel incompleteness? I dont really have that in my lexicon; its garbage theory). Do you even understand the implications of what you are saying, or are you just mindlessly, like a sheep BAAA BAAA BAAAA repeating some "truth" a mathematician with no experimental evidence devised? You know in science you need evidence+theory. Evidence is against your claim since English language seems to be boundless.

>>8650902
a finite number of words in a dictionary doesn't sound boundless to me.

>>8650905
Incorrect. You can always create a new word. You can always create a new symbol. You can use as many words as you want. You can use million words to describe something, then map it all into one word. English language is truly boundless and any idea can be expressed in it. If one can't express something, he just adds words/symbols following the rules of language.

>>8650913
have you every experienced something words can't explain?

File: back-to-pol.jpg (35KB, 490x290px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 490x290px

>>8650784
>Redpill me
gtfo pill-popping /pol/esmoker

>>8650920
For example when I used to be with my ex-gf, I was simultaneously so lonely, despised her, and loved her.

Let's just call this feeling BLABB.

Now if someone asks me what BLABB is, I say
>when you, in a relationship, are simultaneously feeling lonely, despising your partner, and loving your partner

There.

>>8650920
No. There are ao many words with so much power. Contour. Flow. Compression.difussion. dissipation. Angular. Smoothness. You cannot underestimate language. One word can be a megastructure of images.

>>8650892
You actually think this was a simple explanation and my mom could understand it

>>8650926
>redpill me on x. is it just a meme
10 syllables
>How do you know if x is true if it's just a theory (a guass).
At least 11 syllables

It's called concision faggot.

>>8651000
L0Lno, Lrn2concision fgt pls

>>8650926
>Redpill. GO BACK TO /pol/
Even though it's the most retarded thing Ive ever heard, you know what he meant.

>>8650784
Only like a handful of people understand it, so kinda.

>>8650975
My mom could. Maybe your mom just sucks.

>>8651551
>Only like a handful of people understand it,
Just get the fuck out.

First of all, a meme is a idea, a thought, not a fucking 'joke' u newfag fuck.

>>8650784
It's a meme until someone other than Mochizuki's friends is able to understand it.

>>8650892
Then it shows that ABC, Spiro, etc are only valid within sets constructed that way. How can it be shown to translate to normal math?

iutt is just a description of how arithmetic geometry changes wrt underlying space
it's complicated because he has a whole assload of new notation and cites several obscure theorems from obscure circles of obscure mathematicians
i would love to see a "sensible" reformulation of iutt in the style of, say, mumford
probably still wouldn't understand it all ;_; sucks being a brainlet

>>8650807
>implying Kekaya doesn't browse /sci/ and post Wildburger memes

>>8650902
you are literally a retard. Gödel's incompleteness theorem is, inarguably, true. Stop acting like it's a meme. The problem comes in at the assertion that English is a formal system, which, of course, it is not

>>8650784
nobody here understands it.