Re: Solving a * 0 = 0 Plankenstein Monster "IT'S ALLLLiiiiiivvvvvvvve !!!"


T.H. Ray wrote:

T.H. Ray wrote:

T.H. Ray wrote:

T.H. Ray wrote:
Huang wrote:

Existence is not so easily dismissed.

What do you mean by "existence?"

Tom


You know perfectly well what I mean by
existence
you
goose.


I do not. And neither do your articles leave a
clue as
to what you mean by existence.

Tom



Then I'll explain it again so that there is no
further ambiguity.

The existential quantifier, and your usage of it,
is
a declarative
operator which makes the bold claim that things
exist. There exists
this, and there exists that. It is this exact
sense
of existence which
I am referring to, (unless you want to argue that
you
never claimed
that anything existed).

Numbers exist, variable, functions, groups,
rings,
fields, all "exist".

By virtue of that, there is something which we
call
nonexistence. The
round square, the real number 1 which is equal to
2,
etc etc, these
things cannot exist and so we say that they are
"nonexistent".

And, as I proved 3 weeks ago (sloppily), there is
a
third existential
type known as the "trivial". The trivial has
properties of both
existence and nonexistence.

Maybe you could address the original question
instead
of trolling like
an English major ?

Then again - you probably cant.


The "original question" is nonsense.


Quit trying to evade the question.


I am merely trying
to get you to grasp that "existence" in the
mathematical
lexicon is _always_ accompanied by context. The
existential quantifier is used to construct the
context
in which some object can be said to possess
properties
that define the terms in which the object exists.

I think this site does a pretty good job of
explaining
it:


http://www.math.utoronto.ca/mathnet/answers/existence.
html



I think that the site you referenced was written for
kindergarteners.
That site is crap, and so is your rebuttal.

If this is University level math in Toronto then I'm
sending my
daughter there. She is only 3, but I think that a PhD
in math from
Toronto would be a great thing to have for anyone who
has plans to
attend middle school.

I explained this a dozen times last week and if
you've already
forgotten what I taught you last week then you should
probably just
Google it.


Mathematics is the study of propositions of the
form
A -> B. I appreciate that you've convinced
yourself
that you're doing something here, but whatever it
is
you're doing isn't mathematics.

Tom

And what you are doing here is'nt math either. It's
trolling, and being
an ass.


My argument is that the solution set to the original
equation is
indeterminate, existentially and topologically. If
you cannot argue
against that then you forfeit the argument and I win.
Actually, I've
already won. You cannot argue against what I said,
just like last week.

Face it. You're getting your ass kicked, rather badly
I'd say.


You're right. You win.

Tom


Well, I'm not going to gloat about it because it's not much of an
achievement - in and of itself.

However, what you can do with this result _is_ more interesting. Just
assuming for a moment that the debate is resolved, and that
indeterminacy is inherent in mathematics. This explains alot of things.
And it also shows that mathematical physics is probably more valid than
previously thought.

It resolves any and all paradoxes regarding Plancklength.

.

Quantcast