Melchizedek = Michael
Verified User
There's only one Catch,Catch 22
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The art of mathematical argument
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
BidenPresident
Verified User
I have never seen any definition like yours that says all meaningful information is code.
You did not know the basic theories of math and I had to tell you what they were.
A while ago I mentioned conventionalism as one philosophy of math and you admitted you never heard of it. Pretty basic stuff you are not aware of.
BidenPresident
Verified User
I have never seen any definition like yours
You don't know the basic ideas in the philosophy of math. You are a neophyte.
You seem to perceive yourself in a constant state of competition with me.You did not know the basic theories of math and I had to tell you what they were.
A while ago I mentioned conventionalism as one philosophy of math and you admitted you never heard of it. Pretty basic stuff you are not aware of.
So, bottom line, you cannot dispute anything I said about your made up definition of code.
The fact I did not know what the word conventionalism meant must have been a huge victory for you in your mind.You don't know the basic ideas in the philosophy of math. You are a neophyte.
I take it you have decided to not respond to the topic in this thread, which was my responses to your made up definition of code.
Carry on, I am going to move on to some more interesting tangents.
The Ramanujan Summation: 1 + 2 + 3 + ⋯ + ∞ = -1/12?
“What on earth are you talking about? There’s no way that’s true!” — My mom
This is what my mom said to me when I told her about this little mathematical anomaly. And it is just that, an anomaly. After all, it defies basic logic. How could adding positive numbers equal not only a negative, but a negative fraction? What the frac?
https://www.cantorsparadise.com/the-ramanujan-summation-1-2-3-1-12-a8cc23dea793
]
I do not recall ever hearing about that one.
Until someone showed me the proof, I could not understand how 0.999... = 1. It was counterintuitive, without the proof.
One hypothesis
There are many ideas of what a multiverse might be. In particular, Swedish-American physicist Max Tegmark proposed 4 types of multiverses.
In the fourth class of multiverses, Tegmark essentially argues that because abstract mathematics spans the entire realm of the possible, the multiverse is simply the mathematics.
^ according to Don Lincoln of Fermi Lab.
There are many ideas of what a multiverse might be. In particular, Swedish-American physicist Max Tegmark proposed 4 types of multiverses.
In the fourth class of multiverses, Tegmark essentially argues that because abstract mathematics spans the entire realm of the possible, the multiverse is simply the mathematics.
^ according to Don Lincoln of Fermi Lab.
Riemann hypothesis
The Riemann hypothesis is important because prime numbers are the most fundamental — and most fundamentally mysterious — objects in mathematics.
When you plot them on the number line, there appears to be no pattern to how they’re distributed. But in 1859 Riemann devised an object called the Riemann zeta function — a kind of infinite sum — which fueled a revolutionary approach that, if proved to work, would unlock the primes’ hidden structure.
Paul Nelson has solved the subconvexity problem, bringing mathematicians one step closer to understanding the Riemann hypothesis and the distribution of prime numbers.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/math...le-in-quest-to-decode-prime-numbers-20220113/
The Riemann hypothesis is important because prime numbers are the most fundamental — and most fundamentally mysterious — objects in mathematics.
When you plot them on the number line, there appears to be no pattern to how they’re distributed. But in 1859 Riemann devised an object called the Riemann zeta function — a kind of infinite sum — which fueled a revolutionary approach that, if proved to work, would unlock the primes’ hidden structure.
Paul Nelson has solved the subconvexity problem, bringing mathematicians one step closer to understanding the Riemann hypothesis and the distribution of prime numbers.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/math...le-in-quest-to-decode-prime-numbers-20220113/