Deeper than primes

Status
Not open for further replies.
doronshadmi said:
It is clearly not the case because when "not the case" is considered, also "the case" is considered, as seen by:

[qimg]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2554/4149358437_87f574fa79_o.jpg[/qimg]

you can't determine what the operator is witout both input and output.
Click to expand...

What about the basket case?
 
sympathic said:
a programmer who refuses to understand how a function works -- that's a new one.
Click to expand...
A function works only if both input and output are found.

You are invited to show a function that works only by input.

Pay attention that ~X --> X, so ~ operator works only if both input and output are found.
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to understand what the subject of this thread is, but I'm at a loss. Can anybody point to a good summary post?
 
AvalonXQ said:
I'm trying to understand what the subject of this thread is, but I'm at a loss. Can anybody point to a good summary post?
Click to expand...

It is about the inability of any amount of segments to be exactly an endless (edgeless) straight line (and as a result we get an infinite extrapolation of segments), or the inability of any amount of segments to be exactly a point (and as a result we get an infinite interpolation of segments).
 
doronshadmi said:
It is about the inability of any amount of segments to be exactly an endless (edgeless) straight line (and as a result we get an infinite extrapolation of segments), or the inability of any amount of segments to be exactly a point (and as a result we get an infinite interpolation of segments).
Click to expand...

So, wait, you're talking about summing together line segments and determining whether or not their sum can equal a straight line?
 
AvalonXQ said:
So, wait, you're talking about summing together line segments and determining whether or not their sum can equal a straight line?
Click to expand...

That's the best guess.Doron thinks that his spectacles explain it.
 
Last edited:
The+Point.jpg
 
All right, so let's make sure that we're on the same page as to what we're talking about.
I assume we're referring to two-dimensional Euclidean space, yes? A plane that can be mapped out in Cartesian coordinates?
If so, then a point is defined as a specific location on the plane, which can be uniquely determine by its coordinate, such as (3,5).
A line is defined as the set of all of the points whose coordinates obey a specific algebraic relationship, namely y = a*x + b for some set values of a and b.
A line segment is defined as the set of all of the points within a given line that fall between two established points -- all (x,y) where y = a*x + b, c<=x and x<=d for some set values of a, b, c, and d.
Are we in agreement on the above definitions?
 
AvalonXQ said:
All right, so let's make sure that we're on the same page as to what we're talking about.
I assume we're referring to two-dimensional Euclidean space, yes? A plane that can be mapped out in Cartesian coordinates?
If so, then a point is defined as a specific location on the plane, which can be uniquely determine by its coordinate, such as (3,5).
A line is defined as the set of all of the points whose coordinates obey a specific algebraic relationship, namely y = a*x + b for some set values of a and b.
A line segment is defined as the set of all of the points within a given line that fall between two established points -- all (x,y) where y = a*x + b, c<=x and x<=d for some set values of a, b, c, and d.
Are we in agreement on the above definitions?
Click to expand...

All except one of us...
 
AvalonXQ said:
If doronshadmi doesn't agree with these definitions of terms, I'll wait for him to say so and explain.
Click to expand...

I understand where you're coming from, but Doron has addressed all those points in this thread already. We had several pages just about (x, y) and [x, y) and (x, y].
 
doronshadmi said:
jsfisher said:
Oh, and this is important: What difference does it make whether negation is "based on an ability to compare" or not? What is the demonstrable consequence of your misguided notion?
Click to expand...
Because Negation is exactly the ability to compare between different things, where different things are two or more things.
Click to expand...


Not only is what you wrote not an English sentence, it does not even pretend to address the two questions I put to you. Would you care to try again?

What is the demonstrable consequence of your misguided notion?

Notice I used the word, demonstrable. That means it needs to be something we all can observe, not just something you claim be there. You have claimed so many, many things simply because you made it up. Here, you need to provide something of more substance that inconsistent gibberish.

So, again, what is the demonstrable consequence of your misguided notion?
 
ddt said:
"Organic Mathematics (A Non-formal Introduction)".
Non-formal, because it defies being formalized.

More accurate: it's as real as the emperor's new clothes.

You've got exactly 0 subscribers on scribd. Great success thus far!
Click to expand...


Well, didn't Doron already explain that ~X means absolutely nothing? In that case non-formal => ~formal => absolutely nothing of meaning. I think Doron may have finally got something right.
 
AvalonXQ said:
If doronshadmi doesn't agree with these definitions of terms, I'll wait for him to say so and explain.
Click to expand...

dafydd said:
What odds will you give me that the explanation will be couched in pure,unadulterated gibberish?
Click to expand...

Waiting to until doronshadmi gives a clear explanation is like waiting until Saint Glinglin, until pigs fly, until hell freezes over, until Easter and Pentecost are on the same day, until the calves dance on the ice, etc., and that all at once (link).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom