No such thing as infinity

  • 20 Replies
  • 1767 Views
?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
No such thing as infinity
« on: August 21, 2008, 07:28:29 PM »
Assume a line of length x where x is a finite number greater than 0.
Divide it into an infinite amount of segments of equal length.

What is the length of each segment?
0

The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments. What is the total line length?
0 = length * count = 0 * infinity


Since a finite number greater than 0 can never be 0, there is no such thing as infinity.

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2008, 07:30:14 PM »
then, my friend, what comes after one
an vir

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2008, 07:45:15 PM »
Assume a line of length x where x is a finite number greater than 0.
Divide it into an infinite amount of segments of equal length.

What is the length of each segment?
0

The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments. What is the total line length?
0 = length * count = 0 * infinity


Since a finite number greater than 0 can never be 0, there is no such thing as infinity.

limx→∞ 0x = 0

Therefore, if we divide the line into a successively greater number of segments, the limit of the sum of their lengths as the number of segments approaches infinity is zero, and in this particular case we see that 0 * infinity = 0.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2008, 07:58:34 PM »
No, the limit of the sum of their lengths is always x, until the magical moment you have an infinite number of segments, then the sum of their lengths is 0.

Infinity is so unreal, you have to use limits to talk about it. Why do you use finite numbers to predict infinite ones? That doesn't make any sense.

There cannot be infinity, and I have demonstrated that.

?

mwahaha

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2008, 08:20:37 PM »
No such thing as infinity? Now that is outlandish.

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2008, 08:22:41 PM »
what's the biggest number possible, then? Write it down....

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2008, 08:54:02 PM »
No, the limit of the sum of their lengths is always x, until the magical moment you have an infinite number of segments, then the sum of their lengths is 0.

Infinity is so unreal, you have to use limits to talk about it. Why do you use finite numbers to predict infinite ones? That doesn't make any sense.

There cannot be infinity, and I have demonstrated that.


No, no, NO! The mere existence of your posts proves that you are infinitely stupid.

So: Infinity does exist. And I have just demonstrated that.

?

mwahaha

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2008, 09:05:55 PM »
what's the biggest number possible, then? Write it down....


*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2008, 09:09:03 PM »
We made it quite clear. That ain't a number.
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

?

mwahaha

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2008, 09:17:54 PM »
Yes, it is. Learn maths.

?

Moonlit

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6061
  • The Rebound
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2008, 09:22:39 PM »
what's the biggest number possible, then? Write it down....



I think that's a representation of an undefined number....which is infinity.
Let me also make it clear that I may not have a clue as to what I'm talking about so please don't think I think I do.  ;D
You think that a photograph is indisputable evidence?  Would you like me to show you a photograph of Barack Obama having sex with a gorilla?

*

Wendy

  • 18492
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #11 on: August 22, 2008, 01:56:11 AM »
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and narcberry's stupidity. And I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #12 on: August 22, 2008, 01:58:18 AM »
Wow. Narcberry's really famous!
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #13 on: August 22, 2008, 06:49:01 AM »
Is that a genuine pic of narc's arse? 
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Video proof that the Earth is flat!

Run run, as fast as you can, you can't catch me cos I'm in the lollipop forest and you can't get there!

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #14 on: August 22, 2008, 07:02:07 AM »
The problem with considering infinity as a number is that it infinity has more attributes than a canonical number. Due to that fact, it is difficult to compare infinities with canonical numbers, yet much simpler with other infinities.

For example.
Consider three infinite sets of pennies.
Set1: A penny exists every 5 centimeters in a line.
Set2: A penny exists every 10 centimeters in a line.
Set3: A penny exists every 2x centimeters in a line, where x = the distance between the previous two pennies.

If you were to take a canonical number, lets say '4', your comparisons become rather repetitive. Sets in below algebra represent the number of elements in that set.

Typical misuse of Infinity
4 - Set1 = -infinity
4 - Set2 = -infinity
4 - Set3 = -infinity

4 * Set1 = infinity
4 * Set2 = infinity
4 * Set3 = infinity

4 / Set1 = 0
4 / Set2 = 0
4 / Set3 = 0

Set1 - Set2 = -infinity
Set3 - Set2 = infinity
               Correct use of infinities
4 - Set1 = -Set1
4 - Set2 = -Set2
4 - Set3 = -Set3

4 * Set1 = 4Set1 (ie pennies every 4/5 cm apart)
4 * Set2 = 4Set2
4 * Set3 = 4Set3

4 / Set1 = 0
4 / Set2 = 0
4 / Set3 = 0

Set1 - Set2 = -Set1
Set3 - Set2 = Set3

The problem isn't considering infinity, it's considering infinity as a single number. Infinity is actually an uncountably infinite set of numbers, like the real numbers. To properly compare them with canonical numbers, their attributes must be fully extrapolated to be accurate. Comparison without extrapolation can give some useful information, but is actually not fully accurate. That would be like saying 4 - 5 = a number. It's true, but not fully accurate, there is more available information.

Integrals and derivatives are helpful concepts to the subject at hand.


?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #15 on: August 22, 2008, 10:45:43 AM »
The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments.

False.

This only holds when the number of segments is finite. Prove this explicitly - otherwise your entire claim is invalid.

Obvious counterexample. Consider A={[x,x]|0<=x<=1} and B={[y,y]|0=<y<=2}

Then clearly length of union of A is 1 and length of union of B is 2. However, each segment in A and B has precisely the same length and A and B contain exactly the same number of elements, so according to your assumption A and B should have the same length.

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2008, 01:19:10 PM »
The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments.

False.

This only holds when the number of segments is finite. Prove this explicitly - otherwise your entire claim is invalid.

Obvious counterexample. Consider A={[x,x]|0<=x<=1} and B={[y,y]|0=<y<=2}

Then clearly length of union of A is 1 and length of union of B is 2. However, each segment in A and B has precisely the same length and A and B contain exactly the same number of elements, so according to your assumption A and B should have the same length.


hahah, looks like someone actually knows math around here
You know what sucks... your doing all this but, its all a lie because your really not doing it because the earth is flat...

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #17 on: August 22, 2008, 05:13:29 PM »
The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments.

False.

Oh really? How many segments are in each set? All infinities are equal?

Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2008, 08:23:37 PM »
The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments.

False.

This only holds when the number of segments is finite. Prove this explicitly - otherwise your entire claim is invalid.

Obvious counterexample. Consider A={[x,x]|0<=x<=1} and B={[y,y]|0=<y<=2}

Then clearly length of union of A is 1 and length of union of B is 2. However, each segment in A and B has precisely the same length and A and B contain exactly the same number of elements, so according to your assumption A and B should have the same length.


This link actually contains an interesting (i.e. not trollish) discussion of the problem. Enjoy!

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13128
  • swiggity swooty
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2008, 09:23:27 PM »
 They see me trolling, they failing, errbody tryin' catch me postin' dirty...

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: No such thing as infinity
« Reply #20 on: August 23, 2008, 01:37:06 AM »
The total line length is the segment length * the number of segments.

False.

Oh really? How many segments are in each set? All infinities are equal?

I didn't use the word "infinity". For each element of A, I can show you a corresponding element of B. That's the way we compare the cardinality of sets. If I can match up each of my fingers with a toe, I don't need to actually count the totals to claim that I have as many fingers as toes. So I don't need to show you how many elements are in A (or B) for my counterexample to work - since as long as they have the same number of elements I'm OK.

If you want to use the word "infinity" - YOU need to define it. It makes no sense for me to say that garrwarrblls don't exist without telling you what I mean by a garrwarrbll.

Your argument is running out of steam. Measure theory would give it renewed and vigorous life if you are capable of injecting it...  ;)