flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
Index
> Heap > Lunar CalendarSolar Calendar conflict Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next 
Author 

Borsuc
vid wrote: how did that prove 1/0 is not undefined? Take a number, 0.01... 1/0.01 = 100 Divide it by 10, and then do 1/0.001 = 1000 Divide it again Then again ... and so on, until you reach.... 0.0000000...(infinitely many zeroes)...1 and then do 1/number it's +infinity The idea is in this case you are using a "positive" number, so it's ok to say +infinity. 1/0 (i.e the "pure" 0 is undefined because you do not know whether it's positive or negative). In calculus this is written as: Code: lim 1/x = +infinity x>0 x>0 Quote: isn't universe expanding, eg. approaching infinite (not zero)? 

28 Feb 2008, 19:27 

vid
i agree tham lim(1/x) for x>0 is positive infinite. But that doesn't mean anything for value of 1/0!!!
You could use same argument to argue that 0/0 is 3, because lim(3x/x, x>0)=3, etc. Sorry, byt 1/x 'approaching infinity' for increasing x has nothing to do with value of 1/0. That simply doesn't work. Quote: well yes, I never said that it does compress, merely pointing out that edfed was right (even though he did not know), of course if the Universe were to compress like he said (which I doubt). edfed didn't say that universe is shrinking either. He told it is expanding (which is AFAIK scientific consesus today). 

28 Feb 2008, 19:43 

edfed
to explain the universe expansion, we can use the size_of_universe=1/0 equation.
why? because each iteration (expansion of universe) cause th eresult to become bigger. the time is the reason why universe is expanding. without time, the universe is instantly infinite. but the time is like an iteration, to aproximate teh result of the 1/0 equation. but why 1/0? it's a bit abstract, 1 is the primal universe, the fact that there is "something", 0 is the reality of the primal universe, it was a size = 0, all charges into this (why charges existed? because!) the distance between these charges was 0, then the energy caused by this was infinite. then, an explosion occurs, the legendary "big bang" as there is no matter in the vaccum, the expansion isn't stopped. then, it's an infinite solution that don't have any end. in 1000000000000000 years, the calculus will still operate, and the 1/0 solution will be never found, because infinite, is infinite. if i was a master, so graduate scientist, i can explain this whith formulas and theorems, but it's not the case. with lim (1/0) = infinite, it's impossible, because there is no limit to infinite. 

28 Feb 2008, 20:03 

Borsuc
vid wrote: i agree tham lim(1/x) for x>0 is positive infinite. But that doesn't mean anything for value of 1/0!!! I ask you to do this: Take a number GREATER than 0, such that you can't find any other smaller number than this one. What would that number be? It's +0 vid wrote: You could use same argument to argue that 0/0 is 3, because lim(3x/x, x>0)=3, etc. 0/0 is not 3, because you don't "replace" in the limit straightforwardly directly the values, only when you CAN. More likely, 3*0/0 is 3, and it's quite true in fact, assuming both ZEROES are the +0 or 0 previously mentioned. This is the idea of infinite numbers, infinite precisions. On a side note, did you know that 0.999999999999... (infinite many 9s) is EQUAL to 1? The proof doesn't necessarily lie in calculus either. There's this number, 1.0. Divide it by 9. You get 0.1111111111..... Multiply it by 9, you get.. surprise surprise, 0.9999999999..... Where's the problem? The order of operations does NOT MATTER for multiplication, therefore: 1/9 * 9 = 1 by simplifying, but in the previous example, it was 0.99999999.. How so? Because they are equal. By your logic, irrational numbers wouldn't exist either (i.e infinite 'precision' numbers). vid wrote: edfed didn't say that universe is shrinking either. He told it is expanding (which is AFAIK scientific consesus today). anyway I only debated about the 1/0 stuff. 

28 Feb 2008, 20:05 

vid
your argument would apply if 1/0 was same as 0.0000...infinite zeroes...0001. But it isn't. Simply, 1/0 is UNDEFINED in about every number group (or whatever is proper term) there is.
Assigning infinity as value of 1/0 is demonstrably wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_by_zero#Formal_interpretation 

28 Feb 2008, 20:14 

edfed
first thing to do is to stop thinking human when speaking about 1/0 or big bang.
yes, the 1/0 and the big bang are the same. simply imagine, yes it's a question of imagination and idea, there is no materials into this idea. the universe was in 1 bubble, size = 0 when this bubble start to "contain" "something", like energy, ideas or spirits, it began the expansion, instantly, the 0 of this equation appears, and then the big bang occurs. just imagine, there is nothing (0) into something (1) then, to know how many nothing there is in the something, you make the 1/0 division, the universe, god, or spirit, (something like this) began to compute, and the surprise was the big bang. yes, the big bang is only a 1/0 division, an idea coming from the deep conceptual spiritness of philisophy. and as it's a really hard thing to understand, it's hard to explain. but i'm sure it's the solution. 1/0 = big bang. infinite expantion of an infinite solution that will never end. 0,{9} isn't equal to 1 about the 1/0 tricks, there is still no valid human interpretation, so, referring to any "community accepted" human knowledge is an error. why? because it's a methaphisic thing, even math cannot explain it. the only way to explain it is to accept the infinite solution. 

28 Feb 2008, 20:14 

Borsuc
vid wrote: your argument would apply if 1/0 was same as 0.0000...infinite zeroes...0001. But it isn't. Simply, 1/0 is UNDEFINED in about every number group (or whatever is proper term) there is. Even Computer Algebra Systems know this Also, AFAIK, some professor assigned values to 1/0 (the pure zero), something like metaplanes or such, really weird IMO. And the equations worked. edfed wrote: 0,{9} isn't equal to 1 

28 Feb 2008, 20:21 

edfed
as 0,{9} < 1, no it is not equal.
0,{9} = 0,{9} 1 = 1 you can try to proof your idea, but it's not true. in this case, 0,{0}1 = 0 but no, it's not true too. because 0 is the ABSOLUTE presence of NOTHING. 0 = 0 1 = 1 ... 

28 Feb 2008, 20:36 

Borsuc
I agree, 0 is the ABSOLUTE presence of nothing. But so is INFINITY the ABSOLUTE presence of EVERYTHING.
Therefore, having an infinite number of 0s (or 9s) after the decimal point makes it "special" (I don't know how to explain this better to you). 

28 Feb 2008, 20:40 

edfed
i agree with you, it's hard to explain.
but, if you make some "effort" of nonhuman mind, you'll approach the solution. nonhuman don't mean computer, as computer is just an human extention, invented to expand the human sensations and possibilities. like cars, tools, etc... if you understand the real NOTHING, and the real no time, no universe, no energy, NOTHING, then you can understand the 1/0. moderators: sorry, i'm the king of troll, but it's becaus eeverything is linked. yes, the calendars are linked to the 1/0 bigbang. 

28 Feb 2008, 21:35 

vid
Quote: Like I said, as long as you take a POSITIVE ZERO (i.e you come from the positive side), then there won't be the inf = +inf contradiction, and it WILL BE FINE, and in fact it is in calculus. And the size of the Universe can't be negative, can it? (what would a negative size mean anyway) there is nothing like "positive zero" in any number field (rational numbers, real numbers, complex numbers, whatever) i know. There is limit which can approach zero from either side, but there is no "positive zero". Yes, there are some mathematical constructs which have "unsigned infinity", but then you must drop lot of useful stuff (limits of decreasing and increasing functions are same, etc.). In practice, 1/0 is undefined in all of common fields: integers, real numbers, i/rational numbers, complex numbers, imaginary numbers, etc. etc. If you want 1/0 to be infinity, you are forced to drop lot of features of these fields. What for? Quote: Also, AFAIK, some professor assigned values to 1/0 (the pure zero), something like metaplanes or such, really weird IMO. And the equations worked. maybe you are referring to "nullity" idea... in that case, no, equations didn't work. they were pretty unusuable. 

28 Feb 2008, 21:53 

MichaelH
edfed wrote:
Are you sure it's not instantly finite? BTW, since you know so much about such things as infinity, which is better, an Infinite Improbability Drive or a warp drive? ......... can't remember exactly when I became such a geek http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warp_drive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_Improbability_Drive 

28 Feb 2008, 23:56 

revolution
Without a shadow of a doubt the IID is much cooler than the boring WD. H2G2 is objectively much more entertaining than ST. WD has too many practical limitations IID has no limits It is a pity DA is now dead, I miss his wit, intelligence and humour.


29 Feb 2008, 03:28 

MHajduk
edfed wrote: as 0,{9} < 1, no it is not equal. Hence 0.(9) is a sum of terms of infinite geometric sequence with the initial value equal 9/10 and common ratio 1/10. Therefore


29 Feb 2008, 09:36 

revolution
I always liked this little proof:
1/9 = 0.1111... 8/9 = 0.8888... Add those two together and you get: 9/9 = 0.9999... BTW: These little maths anecdotes should probably be moved to a separate topic. 

29 Feb 2008, 09:53 

victor
Let y = 0.9999... and call this Equation (1).
Hence, 10y = 9.9999... and call this Equation (2). (2)  (1): 9y = 9 y = 1 Thus, 0.9999... = 1. 

29 Feb 2008, 10:10 

MHajduk
victor
I liked your method. But this will work only for numbers which could be written in form 0.(xyz...), i.e. periodic decimals. 

29 Feb 2008, 10:51 

edfed
Quote:
this show well the limits of human logic and mathematics. as we named i or j the 1²=1 number. in reality, the i or j number exists, and have an unknown value, unabordable for the human brain. then, yes, refering about a pure human science, yes, 1=0,(9) but, refering to the real facts, it's not true. math can explain many things, but they cannot explain maths itself. and this math anecdote cannot be moved somewhere else, as it will try to explain the time base used by calendars. if the forward evolution of calendar to 1=0,(9) is possible, the reverse is possible too. and it will be the polynomial resolution attempt of the time equation. let it go, we'll see. 

29 Feb 2008, 12:51 

revolution
edfed wrote: but, refering to the real facts, it's not true. 

29 Feb 2008, 12:58 

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next < Last Thread  Next Thread > 
Forum Rules:

Copyright © 19992020, Tomasz Grysztar.
Powered by rwasa.