I cannot be bothered working out what fallacy this is so i have termed it trolling stupidity
That's fine, but I'll term your inability to engage with it mathematical stupidity.
[quote=CharlieMungus ]We are taking one thing and adding it to another.
Not in a mathematical sense you're not - and no, that doesn't mean you can't apply maths to what is happening there, I already explained how that works. I also already pointed out that maths can handle the macro situation through the use of set theory:
one raindrop U one raindrop = one raindrop.
[img] https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/a7464809a40f9e486de3a454745f572fbf8bb256 [/img]
Charlie, you're telling me that there isn't some fundemental truth to maths? Despite the above?
Fundamental truth would not be dependent upon axioms and would be universally applicable
But the fact that there is a mathematical sense and an non mathematical sense demonstrates that it is a model. And yes, In mathematics, 1+1 maybe 2, but it does not apply to everything. Yes, adding atoms works but that is remodelling the situation, which is entirely sensible but then you in are refraining the situation so that the mathematical model cam be applied. That does not contradict anything I have saidNot in a mathematical sense you're not - and no, that doesn't mean you can't apply maths to what is happening there
one raindrop U one raindrop = one raindrop
Are you defining the first raindrop as the set of a member of the set?
If the reports of who is being lined up for Education in the US government, science could be in quite a bit of trouble.
If the reports of who is being lined up for Education in the US government, science could be in quite a bit of trouble
I just looked it up... Ben Carson?!!! We're all in trouble...
