Thread replies: 18
Thread images: 5
Thread images: 5
File: 1493926019082s.jpg (9KB, 222x250px) Image search:
[Google]
9KB, 222x250px
Zeno of Elea was a Greek philosopher(c. 500 B.C.) whose name is the
earliest associated with the paradox of infinity. He devised several
paradoxes of endlessness, the simpliest of which involved a fabled
hero of the Trojan War:
If Achilles is to run from point A to B, he must first travel half the
distance, then half again, and so on. Taking the distance from A to B
as one, the distance Achilles must travel is the series
1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8......
Because there is an infinity of terms in this series, Achilles can
never reach his goal.
The problem with Zeno's paradox is that Zeno was uncomfortable with
adding infinitely many numbers. In fact, his basic argument was: if
you add infinitely many numbers, then - no matter what those numbers
are - you must get infinity. If that was true, it would take forever
for Achilles to run from A to B, and this clearly was false.
The modern approach to mathematics and science resolves this paradox
by using the idea of limits. If you temporarily stop worrying about
the infinite number of steps to end this series of distances, and
instead concentrate of the start, you can see a tendency or trend.
Adding the first 2 gives 3/4; adding the first 3 gives 7/8; adding the
first 4 gives 15/16 , etc. So look at the sequence :
1 3 7 15 31 63
--- , --- , --- , ---- , ---- , ---- , ...
2 4 8 16 32 64
>>
Mathematicians now look at that and say what is happening is clearly
that the results are getting closer and closer to one. So we say that
that ultimate limiting value *IS* the sum of all the infinite number
of fractions.
But, you might say, just because a mathematician thinks this looks
like a nice theory, is it really true? I say "YES!", because this
theory is proven out every time someone runs from first base to second
base, or whenever a rock is dropped and actually hits the ground.
Nature is actually doing the infinite number of calculations in a
finite amount of time and getting a finite answer. This is another of
many ways where if you look at the mathematics of numbers in just the
right way, then it can help explain how nature really works.
>>
How can numbers be real if our eyes aren't real?
>>
File: 1460792514515.jpg (41KB, 543x549px)
41KB, 543x549px
>>82394118
>>82394138
go on
>>
>>82394118
Really gets my noggin joggin
>>
>>82394159
eyes
plural
two eyes
one mind
1-2=1
>HOLEEFUK!
>>
>>82394118
Impressive. Never thought that /tv/ can actually activate my almonds.
>>
1×11×1 is basically summing 1 just ONE TIME, hence the result is by definition 1.
A×1A×1 is basically summing A just one time or summing 1 an A number of times which gives A.
Most importantly we have shown through mathematics and also the application of mathematics on science and engineering that indeed 1×1=11×1=1.
just the ramblings of a mad man
>>
>>82394666
edit:
1 x 1
a x 1
>>
File: Terrence_Howard_TIFF_2011.jpg (166KB, 422x540px)
166KB, 422x540px
>tfw to smart for standard math
>>
File: be_water_my_friend_t.jpg (24KB, 300x250px)
24KB, 300x250px
>>82394666
>1x11x1=1
>>
>>82394118
Stop trying to explain Niggernomitry, the man is a high functioning retard
>>
>>82394118
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/mahatmagan103630.html
>>
poor STEM skills aside, I wish /tv/ had at least a small Empire following that I could have comfy bantz with every week.
>>
Define one. Now define two.
/Thread
>>
>>82394666
I'm retardo, satan, but wouldn't that be A^2
>>
Nigthagorus theorem
>>
>>82394118
>he doesnt know about the sum of an infinite geometric series
u/1-r for r<1 bro
Thread posts: 18
Thread images: 5
Thread images: 5