Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 49
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?Page 2 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)

do they really understand the true/objective nature of reality? If they change their theories, and they change their math, when do they ever arrive at "the truth"?

Of course not. How stupid do you think they are?
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 56
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 12:12:50 PM
@ Lover

Where is that in?

I'll look it up and get back to you. Meanwhile, have a beer...
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 60
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 12:25:04 PM

That's assuming a straight line exists. Perhaps a straight line is nonexistent.

Or maybe it only exists in your mind? Remember, when you imagine a straight line, the keyword is "imagine".
Everything you think is a construct of your mind based on prior constructs built on the most common and "reliable perceptions you've had through your life. What you might fail to see is that things you take as intuitively obvious may themselves be assumptions of reality based your perceptions of it, which may be erroneous.

This, I think lies at the heart of what many might call the "mystery" of quantum mechanics. It is my opinion that the apparent (conceptual, not actual) paradoxes of QM result from just such "axioms" of our perception of reality.

I'll take a look at your "straight line proof" later and see if I can spot a bad assumption for you.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 63
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 12:27:06 PM

Let's say we just forget this thread and all go have a drink.

I'm with you buddy! Sometimes math is so dry it makes me parched. Come to think of it, that's why I drink!...Let's go!
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 64
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 12:29:50 PM

How do you know that your perception is in fact a perception?

Because I have defined it to be.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 67
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 1:17:17 PM

consistency is really nice when trying to find answers.

Yes, but it limits you to a smaller toolkit and consequently fewer answers.
On the plus side, at least you have some consistency.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 74
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 4:48:52 PM

if one even believes that there is an objective reality, much less that objective reality is actually knowable. (Hint: Kant didn't think so)

And he was right. I believe an objective reality exists, but it is probably so far removed from our experience that we'll never know much about it. What is it to "know" something? We can see an orange, feel it's texture, weigh it, taste it, cut it up and look at it, learn it's molecular structure and probably experience it in a million other ways, but at what point would we know it? Can we ever know all there is to know about a simple orange? I would suggest we never will.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 75
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/19/2009 6:47:11 PM
RE Msg: 109 by JustDukky:

if one even believes that there is an objective reality, much less that objective reality is actually knowable. (Hint: Kant didn't think so)
And he was right. I believe an objective reality exists, but it is probably so far removed from our experience that we'll never know much about it. What is it to "know" something? We can see an orange, feel it's texture, weigh it, taste it, cut it up and look at it, learn it's molecular structure and probably experience it in a million other ways, but at what point would we know it? Can we ever know all there is to know about a simple orange? I would suggest we never will.
One of the greatest empiricists we've ever had, Hume, pointed this out, that we can never REALLY know anything, not even a simple orange. All that we have are our sense experiences of the orange, and that is woefully pititful compared to the orange itself. We cannot even know if the orange even exists, or is just a fiction of our imaginations, and a false interpretation of our sense experiences. That's what Hume says.

They say that "Great minds think alike", JustDukky. You think very alike to Hume.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 79
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 7:50:35 AM

if we ever get some reason to reconsider the word , character , or value assigned to one then I'm sure we'll fix things up right away.

That's right! We did the last time didn't we?

It just slays me that people practically come to blows over whether it's Mom or the blanket that tucks us in at might, while others b¡tch about the blanket itself being a patchwork quilt that doesn't go with the decor. Can't we just enjoy the warm fuzzy feeling it gives us and say goodnight? For one thing, I'd like some quiet so I can sleep it off!
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 80
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 8:43:24 AM
RE Msg: 117 by annasthasia:
Interesting... There are some very wrong assumptions... The poster using modulo is hilarious... Is a programming term that simply means the remainder of a division.
The correct term in programming is MODULUS, not modulo. Modulo comes from mathematics. Modulo arithmetic was around when computers were not even invented.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 82
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 10:14:49 AM
@ loverofwisdom

Where is that in?


Here's a link I dug up for ya. It's only a dribble of info, but it captures the essence.

http://phoenicia.org/zeno.html
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 83
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 10:32:57 AM

QM gives us yet another answer to the same subjective experiences that all of us have when we interact with the world around us.

Yes but it also shows us consistent, repeatable, counterintuitive facts as a result of a kludged-up, inconsistent patchwork quilt with no intrinsic reality of its own effectively predicting the empirical findings which became facts. If mathematics doesn't exist, has no connection to some fundamental underlying reality we'll call nature, and is too inconsistent to get out of its own way, would you not call it an astonishing coincidence that it can be used to systematically predict facts of nature? Would you rather contend that it is our perception that in some sense justifies an apparent correlation between nature and mathematics, or would you concede that there may be a justifiable connection between them that you may not have seen?
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 84
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 11:14:25 AM
A group of axioms like x=x creates a box where everything in that box is consistent and provable.

Only if it is limited in its scope. There are systems that are just so limited, yet useful, in that they escape the "Gödel curse", which therefore makes them both consistent and complete. I suggest you look up Pressburger Arithmetic. It is a "weak" system in that it is limited, but does have the advantage of being consistent, complete and decidable for any statement you can make in it.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 85
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 11:44:20 AM
RE Msg: 121 by annasthasia:
Scorpiomover...

Modulo is the French term that I used... Thanks, I now know the English equivalent.
You're welcome.

Here is the link...

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulo

Modulo and or modulus means the same thing. In programming it is a function used to calculate "le reste".
This is what it says in the English version:
The word modulo, in the mathematical community, is often used informally, in many imprecise ways. Generally, to say "A is the same as B modulo C" means, more-or-less, "A and B are the same except for differences accounted for or explained by C". For details, see modulo (jargon).

In the various branches of mathematics, it may be used in connection with:
modular arithmetic, a ≡ b (mod n)
modulo operation, in computing, the remainder after division
an ideal (ring theory) in ring theory of mathematics.
an equivalence relation.

It also may refer to:
Módulo, a Brazilian company specializing in IT governance.
Ferrari Modulo, a concept car from 1970.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulo

However, it's not the only term that is used for calculating a remainder in computing. Some languages like Vb use Mod as a remainder operator. But I seem to recall that other languages use other terms similar to remainder.

Anyway... I am sure you will find something to argue about... It will not surprise me...
I'm sure I will.

Here is an other link... my friend Wikipedia...

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulo_(informatique)

I doubt you'll read it... It is in French...
That's what translate.google.com is for.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 88
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 12:34:28 PM

Not only do the three views expressed there fail to be consistent with each other, they fail to be consistent with scientific theories that arisen before them.

You are talking about inconsistency with one possible interpretation of the empirical facts (Copenhagen - which itself is probably inconsistent on some levels) which was postulated as an explanation of experimental tests of mathematical hypotheses. Obviously that isn't what I was referring to when I spoke of consistency, as you should know.

how do you know if they are correct

I don't...nobody does. Don't confuse a search for "truth" with the consistency of experimental facts. If Newton were alive today he'd still be in danger of a falling apple if he sat under the tree. Apples consistently fall down (if we concede that they exist in a gravitational field (or orchard) and agree on up & down, etc.).

If they do have something to do with reality, then I ask you to what extent do they (quantify it for me since you like math so much - what percent, etc. are they correct in their relation to realty), and more importantly - on what basis do you know that?

You draw a lot of erroneous inference from a simple question in your attempt to throw it back at me. I asked a question of you (which you haven't bothered to answer); how does that oblige me to prove some hypothesis to you? How is an interrogative a statement of one?

This is basic logic and should not be so difficult to grasp

I thought we were talking about the existence, consistency & validity of formal reasoning. We already know (in formal mathematics and logic) that no rich formal system can prove its own consistency, so what makes you think your logic will be reliable when your own argument is a refutation of it? Why would you rely on it?

On what basis do you know (or not know) that there is a justifiable connection between nature and math?

I don't; I was asking you if you thought there might be one.

What do you mean by "justifiable"? That is a very subjective and "touchy-feely" criterion. What may be justifiable to you, may not be justifiable to others, etc.

By "justifiable" I meant had a reasonable rationale suggesting validity. Do you want my definitions for any of the other words, or do you think you might know what they probably are?

How many times does the sun have to rise before we can be certain that it will rise tomorrow?

That clearly has nothing to do with what I asked you. I asked you about the consistency of facts (not theories). Did the sun rise this morning or didn't it? (I missed it...I was sleeping it off.)
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 92
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 1:39:11 PM

I still am waiting for your evidence that mathematics produces objective truth..................could you please speak a little louder............................maybe more clearly........................I still can't hear you.............................I still have NEVER heard ANY evidence for your unfounded claim that mathematics can produce objective truth..................................hello? Is anybody home?..................

Out to lunch just like I thought. Hey, why don't you try going on ebay to see if you could find a brain - you are in severe need of one.


You are seriously freaking out that someone hasn't replied to you in 59 minutes on a web forum? You need help, my friend... Not to mention the 3 posts you made between.

You have also, I note as an outside observer, failed utterly to refute any particle of BukkRogers' critique of your apparent complete lack of comprehension in mathematics.

Take all of your money out of the bank, go to the clue store and buy one, mmmkay?
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 93
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 1:46:50 PM

please don't confuse consistency of experimental results with truth

I don't. I notice you didn't enclose "truth" in quotes; do you now feel there exists an objective truth?

That is logically begging the question

Descartes begged a (famous) question; I didn't.

my point is that they are only "faulty" because they are a priori defined to be

They were a priori defined to be NOT faulty. I previously thought you were referring to the "leaks" in the boat (math's natural tendency to be inconsistent). There is universal agreement among mathematicians to eliminate by disallowance any inconsistency they find. The only dispute among them is how much to disallow. I thought you knew that.

That has nothing to do with whether they are true or not true (existentially or objectively).

...but everything to do with whether they are true or not true by definition.

You'll have to forgive my impudence, I spend my days in a garbage truck musing over such things and I'll admit, I sometimes get them wrong, but I'm finding a lot of inconsistency in you statements and arguments. Are you sure you're right?
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 94
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 2:01:21 PM
I still am waiting for your evidence that mathematics produces objective truth...

Isn't that a strawman you set up to trap Bukk? What if he doesn't take the bait? Aren't you the one actually making the claim by first bringing it up? If so, isn't the burden of proof that it's false yours to bear?
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 96
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/20/2009 7:46:10 PM


I've been reading through all these posts and noticed something kind of odd. The original question was "Does 1 always equal 1". Nobody has disproved that yet. All of the math in here keeps showing that other things can ALSO equal 1, but there has not been an instance that shows that 1 does not equal one.


It's an axiom (or definition if you prefer). I could use a different axiom if I wanted. I could say that a=0 for all a. In that case 1=0 is true, but 1=1 is not true.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 97
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/21/2009 4:43:07 AM
I'll bet most of you never imagined that 1=1 could be so controversial. I'm glad it's pretty well settled though...Time to move on...

Does 2=2 ?
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 98
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/21/2009 9:59:02 AM
RE Msg: 95 by SomethinDifferent:
I've been reading through all these posts and noticed something kind of odd. The original question was "Does 1 always equal 1". Nobody has disproved that yet. All of the math in here keeps showing that other things can ALSO equal 1, but there has not been an instance that shows that 1 does not equal one.
1 rock does NOT equal 1 sweet.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 99
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/21/2009 10:27:35 AM

1 rock does NOT equal 1 sweet.

I think I can disprove that theorem:

assume: 1 rock (does not equal) 1 sweet

I have 1 piece of rock candy

It's a rock that tastes sweet

Therefore rock = sweet and by the identity axiom wherein 1=1,

we have: 1 rock = 1 sweet contradiction! (and counterexample)

Therefore [1 rock (does not equal) 1 sweet] is false (which completes the disproof).
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 100
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/21/2009 12:21:31 PM
RE Msg: 150 by JustDukky:
I think I can disprove that theorem:

assume: 1 rock (does not equal) 1 sweet

I have 1 piece of rock candy

It's a rock that tastes sweet

Therefore rock = sweet
That's true for rock candy, and would be true for all rocks and all sweets, if all rocks were only ever rock candy, and all sweets were nothing but rock candy. But that's never been true. Most rocks aren't sweets, and most sweets aren't rocks. Further, it doesn't even matter what most are. All we need to prove that 1 = 1 is not always true, is ONE counterexample. A single simple granite rock will suffice.

But it was fun watching the attempt.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 101
view profile
History
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/21/2009 12:59:30 PM
RE Msg: 152 by Thorb:
1=1 ... only if the 1's are not different ones
[taking for granted you would understand that means apples and oranges]
But 2 apples are not the same either, and 2 oranges are not the same either.
 JustDukky
Joined: 7/8/2004
Msg: 102
1=1 Is it a fact a theory or both?
Posted: 11/21/2009 1:15:59 PM

it was fun watching the attempt.

I do something for a joke and you take it seriously? At least try to be funny & entertaining about it, or are you that determined to play the straight man to my "loony tune"?
The joke's wearing thin, so I won't bother to point out the flaw that shows your refutation of my (only moderately humorous) refutation to be fallacious and invalid. Besides, nobody else would be interested if we wasted their time in a dull trivial argument.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >