Your Little Infinity - from The Fault in Our Stars

No amount of thought and inquiry can make something less beautiful than it would be without. If anything, things become more amazing and awe inspiring as we get to understand them more deeply.

Gisteron is right
Orion is right
I am right
and anyone else is right in there perception.
It is alright to disagree with that too.
Is Gisteron anymore right than anyone else?
Anyone can disagree, yet out of the loyality I have to Jediism and my fellow Jedi, I disagree with you Gisteron.
What point are you making, without actually making it? You say you can prove it without any explanation.
Lol
Your last post sounds like a contradiction... I can disagree with that one too.
You are right in your perception. I am right as well to disagree with it. I do not want to limit anyone elses perception. Yet this sounds like something you are doing.
Maybe I am wrong, and that is fine.
Correct me then please. Help me understand.

We can give a numerical value on anything....
I can say infinity is 6....
600
6000

According to perception...

On the topic of posted.
I wonder how infinity relates to time.
To now...
For it seems infinity can fit...
right
. .
there, between the space
or
.
here, in the space itself.

How subtle the problems in life really are....
If we are not part of the solution...
:lol:

Do numbers exist though, besides as concepts to represent quantity - if not then I'd wager infinity cannot exist simply because it cannot even represent a quantity (with absolute accuracy, being infinite) - so being un-measurable, and therefore outside the realm of 'science'!!? Lol, being left to theoretical math and philosophy instead I guess.

I think calling them irrational numbers is a bit harsh, I think I'm going to call them Jedi numbers from now on LOL....

Irrational
How can a number be irrational?
Who said this?

Numbers are a universal language
Math does not lie...

Jedi numbers...
I like that idea.

Llama Su wrote: Irrational
How can a number be irrational?
Who said this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_number

When is a quantity not a quantity, when it has no actual value. Infinity does not mean too big/small to measure, it means infinitely fragmented into (non zero I think?) parts, hence it would seem to me has no absolute value. As I said though I don't think infinity is even a number. I could be wrong though, I'm woefully short on math, I know just enough to know I know basically nothing about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity

Simply because we do not understand a "irrational" number makes it less rational?
Pi is one of the most beautiful number sequences.
How else would God or the force prove, express, display, or show infinity, if not with numbers?
Pi never ends...
The golden ratio for example has short irrational proof to it as well.
A very beautiful design found throughout the nature of life. Also does not stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
The Fibonacci number, irrational. Can continue to go on "forever".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number

My mind gets bugged out contemplating infinity with the relation to eternity,
:woohoo:

Adder wrote:

Llama Su wrote: Irrational
How can a number be irrational?
Who said this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_number

When is a quantity not a quantity, when it has no actual value. Infinity does not mean too big/small to measure, it means infinitely fragmented into (non zero I think?) parts, hence it would seem to me has no absolute value. As I said though I don't think infinity is even a number. I could be wrong though, I'm woefully short on math, I know just enough to know I know basically nothing about it.

Infinity is a path; if we show numbers on something like this:


where the distance from 0 is the number, (with right being positive and left being negative) if you keep going to right you're getting close and closer to infinity. Although that's a (simplified) mathematics definition. in physics infinity depends on system - for a sphere mirror for examle with radius of 10 cm; 1km is infinity....

Alright, I'll not go too deep into how asinine I think the notion is that two mutually exclusive positions can both be equally valid. I've been there before and I can no longer be bothered thusly.

However, you did prompt me for the proofs I was refering to, so brace yourself:
Postulate: infty/infty <> infty
Proof by contradiction/indirect proof:
Assuming infty/infty = infty
It follows that there are no limits lim(a_n) and lim(b_n) of sequences a_n and b_n, for 1=<n=<infty, respectively, such that lim(a_n)/lim(b_n)=x and x<>infty.
Now let a_n equal 1 for n=1 and recursively a_(n+1) equal a_n + 1. With n ranging from 1 to infty, lim(a_n)=infty.
Also, let b_n equal 1 for n=1 and recursively a_(n+1) equal a_n + a_n!. With n ranging from 1 to infty, lim(a_n)=infty.
However, lim(a_n)/lim(b_n)=lim(a_n/b_n)=0 and that contradicts the premise followed from the assumption.
q.e.d.

Now the second proof.
Postulate: not(infty-infty=x with x=-1 or x=0 or x=1)
Same proof method. Assuming the negation of the postulate which is the initial postulate Alex made.
It follows that there will not be a lim(p_n)-lim(q_n)=x for which x will not equal either of those three outcomes.
Now let p=a and q=b from the previous example.
lim(p_n)-lim(q_n)=lim(p_n-q_n)=-infty and that contradicts the premise followed from the assumption.
q.e.d.

Alright, now that that is out of the way, why don't you next time decide to agree or disagree based on something you actually think and can defend rather than out of mere loyalty. At least that would seem like you cared about whether something is true rather than whether it fits with your feelings or whatever.
As to the point I was making, I summarized it in the last paragraph. Prior to it I was just being nitpicky about Alex' post because you know... math.
Next point: Please tell me what you mean by contradiction. Because clearly we're not using the same definition of that term here since I didn't say anything remotely internally inconsistent nor afaik anything inconsistent with the one reality I hope all of us share.
Yes, you are right to disagree. If you can also explain why you do, perhaps I could learn something from it. Or perhaps somebody else could. It is in silently expressing nothing that we are robbing each other of opportunities to learn and to grow and to expand our "perception", not by voicing ourselves. So please, kindly tell us all what you want to say so that we can benefit from it.
Yes, maybe you are wrong. How sad that you don't care. I sure do if I'm wrong. Heck, I even care if others are. Because none of us live in bubbles and what we think matters not only inside our heads but outside, too.
Yes, you can say infinity is 6. Or any other number. You would be wrong in each and every case, because infinity is neither of those. Its kind of not finite, you know. Its exactly what Pi and sqrt(2) and Phi are not. The fact that our current way of noting numbers is such that it doesn't allow for a finite amount of digits does nothing to demonstrate infinity of either of those actual values. they are there, we can point to them on a scale with some precision - something we cannot do and will never be able to do with infinity. And none of that is a matter of perception because just about all of this is a matter of definition, at least of those numbers. Admittedly, infinity doesn't have a consistent definition in any mathematical sense.
Also, don't confuse infinity with infinitesimals. Remember Zenon and the flying arrow paradoxon. It still flies. Because infinitessimals are not zero and infinity is not a quantity.

On a side note, Adder: Irrational numbers are real numbers. Infinity isn't.

And back to Llama:
Irrational has nothing to do with rationality or our ability to understand. We understand irrational numbers very, very well, actually. Irrational means exactly what it says: Not rational. Cannot be expressed as a ratio. FYI, its the rational numbers that are the weird ones. There set of rational numbers is in fact negligibly small compared to the set of irrational ones, so if anything, the question should be how a number can be rational, when almost none of them are.

Also, learn2math!!
[/epic rant]

And finally, MCSH: No, no amount you walk on the real numbers will get you closer to infinity. As Alex pointed out, infty-y=infty. So, basically, 500 trillion is exactly as far from infinity as 0.064 is.

Um... infinity is not a number. It's a path. There isn't a getting closer to... I said it's simplified Gisteron...

While walking in a path to home, you don't get closer to path - you are on the path always no matter where. I do agree with you and as I said twice before, it was a simplified definition.