>Hurr Durr my Dedekind cuts When did you swallow the

File: 1486634824858.jpg (644KB, 1800x1195px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 1800x1195px

The real redpill is to realize that in the nature there are no...

- Negative amounts of stuff ("There were -5 persons in the room")
- Zero amount of something (The room either has no people or has >=1 persons. There can't exist 0 persons because 0 implies nonexistence.)
- Fractions ("There were 3.25 persons in the room")
- Infinity ("There were infinite number of people in the room")

Thus, we should do math strictly with natural numbers. And not only that, but we should forget about the silly concept of "infinity" and just decide that there are no more numbers after Graham's number.

>>8712968
And if all math were about numbers of "things" you might have a point. But that's not the case.

>>8712968
but you CAN have a negative amount of money and math was made for money

>>8712968
>>8712968
A = Graham's number.
B = succ(A)
B > A
Explain.

>>8712830
How Can Uncountable Infinity Exist If Real Numbers Don't Exist

>>8712968
>Zero amount of something
there is a nonexistence of people in the room you can't infer that means nonexistence of people anywhere. There are absolutely 0 people existing in my kitchen right, there is a nonexistence of people in my kitchen. it checks out.

>negative amounts
negative amounts of velocity certainly exists, it's called deceleration

>fractions
if there were no fractions everything we measure would round up then wouldn't it? That would be great for everyone under 6', but it would suck for me being 6'4".

>infinity
what is time then if not an infinite number line moving towards infinity, while we look backwards at 0 (seeing only the past not the future)

i call bullshit on you

>>8713100
?

A freak like me
Just needs infinity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzy2dgEUOhY

>>8712968
The realer redpill is that integers don't exist either
>there are 2 persons in this room
No, just John and Dave. It requires a certain degree of abstraction to treat them as double amount of the same thing.

>>8713127
>what is time then if not an infinite number line moving towards infinity, while we look backwards at 0 (seeing only the past not the future)

How do you know that when you look backards you dont see the future. Because when you look forward you do infact see the past.

>>8713436
Shut up.

>>8713100
(-)1/12, the (minus) is some sort of an imaginary factor because it shouldn't exist right?

Fight me
Where is the problem in Dedekind cuts ?

>>8712968
Well, smartass, we actually do maths only using natural numbers

>>8713100
>B > A
Really? Please start go to the woods, collect a bunch of sticks and then put one stick on the ground each time you count up to grahams number.

So you go
one, put a stick down
two, put a stick down
...
graham's number, put a stick down.

Then start counting from 1 again and now count up to B. If you run out of sticks before getting to B then indeed B > A

I will wait for you to perform this proof. Until then, what you said right here is complete logical garbage. WHERE IS THE PROOF?

For example
Theorem: 3 > 2
I will now count up to 2

ONE
I
TWO
II

Now I will count up to 3 and each step remove a line

ONE
I
TWO

Oh, I ran out of "sticks". Therefore 3 > 2 QED.

If I can do this for 3 and 2 then you should be able to do it from Graham's number and B. Right? Or else then B = G.

I will wait for your proof.

>>8714357
not him but you sound mad
are you okay ?
no need to reject abstraction so violently right dude ?

>>8714365
I am not mad, but I do not like when people make weird claims like that.

You can't just say B > A without proof. It is ridiculous!

We are mathematicians for a reason. We value rigo more than anything.

>>8712968

Wrong.

The real Red pill is realizing that niggers are inferior and that all mudblooded beasts have lower IQs than the whites.

>>8714372
That's a pretty shitty red pill man because all that means is that what we have to do is fuck white women and leave the dumb white bois to sexually starve and then we can have high IQ white offspring with decently sized cocks (not that cheeto you call a dick) so that they can fuck the next generation of white women too.

Oh, did I say what we have to do? I meant what we are already doing lol. When was the last time you had sex, cuck? Doesn't matter because odds are if you even had sex, that cunt had already been tainted with black power so your cheeto didn't even touch her walls.

File: Plakat-2_B.jpg (17KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x300px

>>8714369
What about philosophical rigour?

>>8714369
you talk of sticks and then claim rigor ?
the definition of the successor in the peano construction is the least element in the set of the upper bounds, by definition of an upper bound, if A happens to be a natural number, succ(A) is greater than A, that's all, no sticks involved

>>8714416
>in the peano construction is the least element in the set of the upper bounds
>least upper bound

>Assuming that every set has a least upper bound

Nice rigor there buddy. It is like you also believe that infinity exists.

>>8712830
>Without reals
>Board behind him says 107.6

...

>>8714424
he only accepts rational numbers

>>8714419
we're only using natural numbers here famalam :^)
i know the existence of the set of natural numbers is but an axiom, but i guess you won't try and avoid natural numbers huh ?

>>8714511
I know you are only using N but you cannot make a claim that every finite set has a least upper bound.

Why?

Because there are "infinite" finite sets. Have you checked them all? I don't fucking think so.

>>8713414
Yeah I read that comic too.

>>8714529
once again, we're only using natural numbers
and the thing's that magic about natural numbers is that, by definition, every part of the naturals has a least element, that's all i'm trying to say, with that you can make anything you want
the position you're holding is not true in terms of propositional logic, as if you find an element in the natural, it has this specific property, therefore, if you want to treat a part of the naturals, it has the property you want
if you want to be a smartass go study homothopy type theory if you don't like ZFC that much, i'm trying to learn set theory so i won't be bothered about homothopy type theory for another 5 years i guess

>>8712830
Can someone give me a quick rundown on this guy?

>>8713414
>>8714560
Which comic is this?

File: 1485876000-20170131.png (447KB, 684x1392px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 684x1392px

>>8715633

>>8714590
>doesn't need irrarionals
>doesn't need infinite sets
>direct descendant of ancient greek philosophers an mathematicans
>300 iq

File: nickyoung.jpg (14KB, 509x335px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 509x335px

>>8714372
>>8714394

File: b0blyfw.jpg (281KB, 1920x1080px)

281KB, 1920x1080px

>>8712968

>>8713436
>Because when you look forward you do infact see the past

What did he mean by this?

Is this some kind of philosophical rambling / social commentary

>>8715841
String theory is just a math circlejerk and has nothing to do with physics.

>>8715876
You take that back!

>>8715856
I guess the point is that information (about something other than the photon itself) is encoded in photons at the exact point they start existing (that information might be altered while the photon is traveling but that's irrelevant here), and they have to travel some distance to be absorbed by a sensor, in this case your eyes. The process of traveling takes time, so the information you receive from photons is necessarily information about an object at some point in the past. The longer the distance, the further into the past you are seeing.

>>8714529
You should jump off a bridge. You won't know you'll die until you observe yourself dying.

File: 818777.png (191KB, 600x323px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 600x323px

>>8715876
String theory is cutting edge physics. What do you think the physicists and engineers do at the LHC? They're smashing protons at higher and higher energy. It's only a matter of time until they discover strings.

>>8714424
Looks like 107*6 to me.

>>8715876
I do string theory in my spare time.

if "string theory".substring(2,5) == "ring":
print "Hello World!"