StarCraft® II

To infinity, and beyond!

Posts: 149
You're seriously garbling concepts here.Zero is not 'proving a negative,' there's no negation of anything in zero.


Saying there are 0 leopards is the same as negating the possibility of there being more or less than 0 leopards. Otherwise, you're simply assigning an abstract value to an abstract idea.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,411
Astrai


In a very superficial sense I think what he is saying is "true".

Zero is "not physical real" in the same sense that any number is not.

There is no strictly "real" one apple. There is no absolute physical means of determining if there are any, or no "leopards" in a room. We have no way of verifying if a vacuum has "zero" things in it.

This of course is just silly "clever" word games which bring us no closer to deriving meaning or understanding of reality.

The purpose here, is that math, in relation to reality, is a means, a process, by which humans attempt to derive understanding of reality and should not be confused by the thing itself.

It's silly and redundant to eagerly point out, "aha,... but "x number" is not real,... see this clever hypothetical I've come up with! " because math from the start never insinuated it was any such thing at all.

The properties, qualities, states, and history of states of physically real objects which math describes for us are very much real, but the math is not this "real" itself, insofar as much real as we say a thing can be real.

That is why in the deeper sense Astrai is right.

When he says there are zero leopards in a room, he is making a very rational, and very importantly, an extremely limited logical argument. At best the only "assumption" he makes, is that we are mature enough to not require a "might as well be interpreted as / is indistinguishable too / let us agree for the argument that " to every sentence he writes.

To read into this very precise and limited statement about reality and attempt to extrapolate from there somehow this whole big mess of other unrelated declarations and assertions about all of reality that Astrai himself did not even claim, or make, to then base an entire line of argumentation on them, is being clever for the sake of being clever.

This does not helps us.

So, yes, Cap. You will not find a "1" or "0", or "5" laying around somewhere for you to pick up.

This is not a great novel transcendent observation.
Edited by MODAX on 3/26/2012 6:12 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,411
Yeah, you're garbling concepts. I'm not saying there are never leopards in rooms, I'm speaking of a specific, testable instance.


And before you chime Astrai, I would point out that I support this statement.

A scientist should not have to preface this very straightforward testable hypothetical with " to the best of my capacity for observation / to a great( or low) degree of probability of "x" order of maginitude it is the case such that / the results are indistinguishable from " etc. etc.

The assumption is that the audience is not some devious rabble rousing playing a game of rhetorical "oneupmanship".

And as for cap, please, I'm not saying this so as to offend or belittle. I don't think you are doing it on purpose. I'm referring that in the more formal sense, the kind of people that take these lines of argument about the "reality" of numbers, tend to be the "clever" philosopher type, a caricature source of much eye rolling to the very humorless serious scientist.
Reply Quote
Posts: 142

Why throw 'humourless' in there? On what basis do you make that statement? Many scientists, and people of a scientific background, have a very solid sense of humour. A bit weird and possibly opaque to people who don't know the minutia of that field, if they go the route of humour relating to their field, but there's nothing about science which insists you hand over humour before joining.


A neutron walks into a bar and orders a drink. He asks "how much?". The barman replies : "no charge for you".
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,745
0 is the absence, how can it be just a concept?
Claiming 0 doesn't exist is like claiming inexistance is inexistant

There are 10 kinds of people: Those who understand quantum computing, those who don't, and 2 kinds that understand and don't understand at the same time
Edited by HuMoDz on 3/27/2012 11:30 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,522
03/27/2012 09:41 AMPosted by MaxPower
A neutron walks into a bar and orders a drink. He asks "how much?". The barman replies : "no charge for you"


03/27/2012 09:58 AMPosted by Astrai
Two atoms were out for a walk when one of them exclaimed, "I've lost an electron!", the other asked "are you sure?" to which the first replied "Yes, I'm positive."

awesome, i need more though if i'm gonna pick up chicks.
03/27/2012 11:25 AMPosted by HuMoDz
Claiming 0 doesn't exist is like claiming inexistance is inexistant

red things are red, cold is cold, animosity is animosity, if things are what they are then it makes sense that zero doesn't exist if you think about it. Of course more often than not things are not what they are. That and things are confusing, which is why you have to sit down and think for awhile before you say things. You have to understand how someone else is looking at something, and then you have to show them they are looking at that thing wrongly. Thing is there is usually more than one right way to see things.
Edited by Necromaster on 3/27/2012 2:32 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,522
03/27/2012 11:25 AMPosted by HuMoDz
There are 10 kinds of people: Those who understand quantum computing, those who don't, and 2 kinds that understand and don't understand at the same time

wouldn't that make for 4 kinds of people? 6 at most I am pretty sure, how are you getting 10?
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,745
03/27/2012 02:34 PMPosted by Necromaster
wouldn't that make for 4 kinds of people? 6 at most I am pretty sure, how are you getting 10?

Qubits...
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,522
03/27/2012 05:29 PMPosted by HuMoDz
Qubits...

i see . . . so 10.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,522
i looked it up, and that why i said i see, thing is i'm still only seeing nine types of people. However i suppose since my understanding of a qubit went from "what the heck is it" to "its that thing i don't really understand", ill take your word for it you can get 10 types of people but in any case we got really off topic. wait binary, derp, diregard most of this post. Actually now I am even more confused because that would mean he said 2 different kinds of people, then proceeded to list 4 kinds of people.
Edited by Necromaster on 3/27/2012 11:41 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 149
03/26/2012 06:09 PMPosted by MODAX
And as for cap, please, I'm not saying this so as to offend or belittle. I don't think you are doing it on purpose. I'm referring that in the more formal sense, the kind of people that take these lines of argument about the "reality" of numbers, tend to be the "clever" philosopher type, a caricature source of much eye rolling to the very humorless serious scientist.


Wrong- I am doing it completely on purpose. I'm not in it to be right. I just like to take interesting positions then see how long I can defend them. Almost everything I say on these forums is purely for aesthetic value. Stepping outside the standard paradigm is fun, even if folks like Astrai don't appreciate it.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,522
03/28/2012 06:17 AMPosted by Astrai
it's much more interesting to learn about how things actually work, instead of trying to learn about unicorns

astrai try using a more awesome imaginary creature like zombies or chthulllu, or funny like the new jersey devil or trolls.

03/28/2012 02:02 AMPosted by capnpufnstuf
Wrong- I am doing it completely on purpose. I'm not in it to be right. I just like to take interesting positions then see how long I can defend them. Almost everything I say on these forums is purely for aesthetic value. Stepping outside the standard paradigm is fun, even if folks like Astrai don't appreciate it.

He likes playing the devils advocate because that is the funner way to play, if you don't get it you don't get it.
Reply Quote
Posts: 149
03/28/2012 06:17 AMPosted by Astrai
But to get pissy about it when people correct the more outrageous aspects of it? That's just daft. Especially in a forum which is about science.


03/28/2012 02:02 AMPosted by capnpufnstuf
then see how long I can defend them.


^^^^^
The only person getting "pissy" here is you, Astrai.

It's easy to be right. It's not easy to understand why you're right. These little discussions help me (and hopefully others) understand why what's right is right. If your worldview is so limited that you can't appreciate this, then I pity you.
Reply Quote
Posts: 322
Playing devil's advocate is fantastic fun if you ask me.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]