j_me - Member
Hoops' law of diminishing sanity:The diameter of the ear ring hoop is inversely proportional to sanity.
Youre about 25 years too late for me there
have you talked about time varying with speed and distance yet/ not read the threa tbh. Technically you have a point in that we all have personal time in a sense which could be best demonstarted if you could travel at near light speed.
I think a clever cyclist gu proved that it was essentially all relative.
Theory of relativity.
Chiropractic.
A friend of mine insisted that people's behaviour was noticeably changed by the full moon.Lunacy.
(Seriously, 's where the term comes from)
True, it does come from lunar.
There is also a reasonably famous study which showed that rates of burglary increased dramaticall around a full moon compared to a new moon. This was taken as proof that the moon affects behaviour in strange ways, until someone said "maybe burglars just find it easier when they can se what they are doing?"
Anyway, back to the god stuff. First, you tell me why every other religion is false and then I'll tell you why yours is.
[url= http://www.kadir-buxton.com/ ]this guys got some wierd theories[/url]
Anyway, back to the god stuff.
No, let's not. It's been done to death here, and it's always just idiots crowing about how superior they are. Let's move on please.
Oh, you can't do that. division is only a model for use with numbers
No it's not. Take a pie, eat some today and some tomorrow. No numbers there but you've divided by two. Numbers are a model for things, and division is a model for things that happen in the physical world. Take a pie, share it between no people, how much do they each have? It's nonsensical.
So... what was this 'singularity'? How did it get there? When did it get there? Has it always been there?
Do I look like an expert in cutting edge Big Bang theory? 🙂
So... what was this 'singularity'? How did it get there? When did it get there? Has it always been there?
Well of course it's not there [i]now[/i]. It went off with a bloody great bang, dinnit!
It was always not-there, then it was, then BANG! Not there any more. See? Everything else was, and going like buggery to get away from the noise.
It's nonsensical.
that's right because zero isn't a number.
Take a pie, eat some today and some tomorrow. No numbers there but you've divided by two.
you've only divided by 2 when you model the problem with numbers
Do I look like an expert in cutting edge Big Bang theory?
dunno, post a pic
It was always not-there, then it was, then BANG! Not there any more. See? Everything else was,
hmm... the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really.
I'm not sure about the 'always not-there' bit, what does 'always' mean when there is no such thing as time?
did the big bang actually make a noise?
box is simpler than fadger but the name may have been taken.
you've only divided by 2 when you model the problem with numbers
Not so. Two is a very real concept. The word 'two' is simply our name for it.
the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really [b]to the completely uninformed layman[/b].
FTFY.
the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to the completely uninformed layman
yeah, but it seems that no one here is anything other than that.
Are you? Can you tell me more about it?
Not so. Two is a very real concept. The word 'two' is simply our name for it.
that's all true, but as I say, you only divide by two when you start modelling
A helium nucleus had a charge of 2e long before we were around to invent the word 'two'. Scalar quantities are a fundamental aspect of reality, they are not part of our model.
it seems that no one here is anything other than that.
Are you? Can you tell me more about it?
Yes, and no respectively.
The thing is that the creation of the universe is something many people are interesting, but the science (such as it is) is pretty impenetrable to the layman. Most that I am (vaguely) aware of is about modelling how the universe expanded out of the BB at varying stages of development. However, figuring out what the BB actually was and how it happened, and what was 'before' it is a lot more esoteric..
Google might be a good place to start, then the works of people like John Gribbin or Martin Rees - although they might be out of date by now. Avoid Hawking, his books are tough going and not as interesting as the others.
Dividing by 0 = Complex infinity (Obviously)
Dividing by 0 = Complex infinity
No - the result of dividing by 0 is 'not defined' because it's nonsensical.
it seems that no one here is anything other than that.
Are you? Can you tell me more about it?Yes, and no respectively.
So.. on the basis that no one here is anything other than an uniformed layman, including you. and that
as you kindly 'fixed for me'the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to the completely uninformed layman.
then
the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to molgrips.
Right?
No - the result of dividing by 0 is 'not defined' because it's nonsensical.
because zero is not a number
A helium nucleus had a charge of 2e long before we were around to invent the word 'two'. Scalar quantities are a fundamental aspect of reality, they are not part of our model.
that doesn't conflict with what I said. Though at a tangent I would question the idea of a measure of a charge of 2e before we were around. If we used a different measurement scale we might say it had a charge of 36.89CHM
Hmm.. Zero is a real integer, just not a natural number.
integer is a whole number right? So you're saying zero is a number?
also this one
the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to molgrips.Right?
I didn't answer that CM - it's clearly a troll because you know I am not a creationist!
Wiki tells me that zero is indeed an integer and therefore a number.
I didn't answer that CM - it's clearly a troll because you know I am not a creationist!
Not a troll, based on what you said. when you fixed my post
Wiki tells me that zero is indeed an integer and therefore a number.
😀
Ok, but what do you think?
I can give you a number of reasons why it is not
The crystalline origin of life is a weird theory that's interesting to read about - put together by a bloke called Cairns-Smith.
The idea that inorganic minerals - rocks basically - were important in prebiotic chemistry is not controversial. The metal ions are capable of catalysing all sorts of organic bond-forming reactions. Cairns-Smith went way beyond this and postulated that clay minerals were a primitive information storage media that preceded organic genes. These inorganic genes acted as repositories for information in the clay crystal structure, which was capable of propagation in certain circumstances.
When pre-biotic synthesis of rna got up and running, a 'genetic takeover' occurred, whereby the inorganic data was transferred to the vastly more efficient organic system.
Dawkins mentioned the theory in one of his books so it has some popular exposure. It's generally seen as a very speculative idea, but respected nonetheless as a piece of original thinking.
Ok, but what do you think?
Well since the question is a mathematical one and I am not a mathematician I will defer to those who are. I am not afraid to admit that I don't know something, and I realise that given my lack of knowledge conjecture is pointless 🙂
It's generally seen as a very speculative idea, but respected nonetheless as a piece of original thinking
If only we could gain recognition for original speculative thinking.. many of us would be more famous than we are 🙂
figuring out what the BB actually was and how it happened, and what was 'before' it is a lot more esoteric..
well no the standard view is the BB created the universe and therefore the laws of th euniverse what happened befor ethis is impossible to say as it was nto borne of these laws as far as we can tell
Answering the question involves a guess,you may guess god if you want to but then I will just ask how god came from nothingness 😆
36.89CHM
I fully intedn to support the SI unit of Internet tomfoolery
I give this thread 12 CHM charliemumgus [ oooh is it mungui?munguses?] damn now it is a 13.4
[b]Well since the question is a mathematical one and I am not a mathematician I will defer to those who are.[/b] I am not afraid to admit that I don't know something, and I realise that given my lack of knowledge conjecture is pointless
Oh that's good to know. I am a mathematician, and I've said it's not. Though wikipedia (I assume that's the wiki you refer to) link also says that a number is a mathematical object used to count and measure. Since zero cannot be used for either of those things, it fails by that definition. Agreed?
I was originally going to say that zero was the absence of numbers, but really it's the absence of quantity isn't it? In real number terms?
You can use zero for counting tho surely? Saying 'I have 0 pounds' is conceptually the same as saying 'I have 3 pounds'.. is it?
PS were you really spoiling for an argument by not telling us you were a mathematician in the first place? Fishing for me to start proclaiming things I didn't know about? 🙂
I give this thread 12 CHM charliemu[b]m[/b]gus
The singular is charliemu[b]n[/b]gu. Equivalent to the tomfoolery of one épater of les bourgeois in Imperial measures. My name is in the plural for much as Legion in the bible, we are many.
PS were you really spoiling for an argument by not telling us you were a mathematician in the first place? Fishing for me to start proclaiming things I didn't know about
No, not looking for an argument, just waiting for you to agree to accept all my proclamations of a mathematical nature. You are now my maths bitch.
You can use zero for counting tho surely?
But what have you counted?
Though wikipedia (I assume that's the wiki you refer to) link also says that a number is a mathematical object used to count and measure. Since zero cannot be used for either of those things, it fails by that definition. Agreed?
But then you can't really use a negative number to count or measure things either can you. Afterall zero apples looks very much like -1 apples when applied to the contents of a fruit bowl. That is without of course getting even more esoteric and bringing in i.
Also not a mathematician by the way, although your comment of
just waiting for you to agree to accept all my proclamations of a mathematical nature.
is an argument from authority and I'd expect better logic from a mathematician. 😉
You are now my maths bitch
Yes, master. I crave knowledge.
But what have you counted?
Depends what you are counting.
Five apples, take away two apples, take away three apples leaves no apples. Not no bananas. Context innit.
It doesn't leave nothing necessarily - there's still a fruit bowl, a kitchen etc.
But then you can't really use a negative number to count or measure things either can you
Yes you can. I give you my apple, you eat it, you not only have no apples but you owe me one. You get an apple you have to give it to me and you have none. Therefore between your fruity snack and your acquiring a new apple you have -1 apples. Debt, innit. Makes more sense when you are counting pounds in your bank account.
And you can clearly use negative numbers to MEASURE things. How cold was it by you in December last year?
0 didn't exist for hundred of years...I think it was invented by some one in india (if i am remembering the quality tv program "the history of maths")
0 was created so that traders could use it........so really 0 doesn't exist it's just something man made, because it made everything easier
0 was created so that traders could use it........so really 0 doesn't exist it's just something man made, because it made everything easier
Like all NUMBERS.
However the concept of magnitude existed before humans and numbers did.
Just read Flan O'Brien - The Third Policeman if you want to see some weird theories, things like darkness just being a secretion of black air instantaneously combusted by candles, light bulbs etc or setting up a system of mirrors so he could see himself as a baby...
Personally I like the idea of doing away with changing the clocks twice a year by determining that sunrise & sunset should always be at 6 o'clock & either shortening or lengthening the hours in between to suit. 😀
Debt, innit. Makes more sense when you are counting pounds in your bank account.
Well except that in the case you made, whether or not the number is negative depends on your persepctive. For the person borrowing and eating the "apple" they have -1 apple, however the person who lent the "apple" has +1 "apple". It's the same "apple" but from different perspectives it can be either +ve or -ve.
Teh joe lucas smoke theory of electricity
Positive ground depends upon proper circuit functioning, the transmission of negative ions by retention of the visible spectral manifestation known as "smoke". Smoke is the thing that makes electrical circuits work; we know this to be true because every time one lets the smoke out of the electrical system, it stops working. This can be verified repeatedly through empirical testing.
When, for example, the smoke escapes from an electrical component (i.e., say, a Lucas voltage regulator), it will be observed that the component stops working. The function of the wire harness is to carry the smoke from one device to another; when the wire harness "springs a leak", and lets all the smoke out of the system, nothing works afterwards. Starter motors were frowned upon in British Automobiles for some time, largely because they consume large quantities of smoke, requiring very large wires.
It has been noted that Lucas components are possibly more prone to electrical leakage than Bosch or generic Japanese electrics. Experts point out that this is because Lucas is British and all things British leak. British engines leak oil, shock absorbers, hydraulic forks and disk brakes leak fluid, British tires leak air and the British defense establishment leaks secrets...so, naturally, British electronics leak smoke.
Negative numbers dont actually exist in the real world we dont have a minus number of anything as we can't go past none. Extinction = zero Dodos
Temoerature is a scale and I doubt you would use that minus number for calculations !! Yaou would use the Kelvin scale but you know that as a physics studier.
Apologies Charlie i give my previous statement " 2 JY's"
Junkyards - SI unit of typos
For the person borrowing and eating the "apple" they have -1 apple, however the person who lent the "apple" has +1 "apple"
Exactly. -1 is still a valid quantity isn't it. They physical quantity of apples you have is -1.
Negative numbers dont actually exist in the real world
Yes they do. Electric charge can be both positive and negative, as can many other things. Negative QUANTITIES or MAGNITUDES do exist. The actual names for numbers we use are irrelevant of course.
But then you can't really use a negative number to count or measure things either can you.
You can use negative numbers to measure things
Why all the bickering?
[img] 
[/img]
0 is a strange beast anyway. The long and the short of it is that mathematicians pretty much get to decide on the properties of numbers, kind inventing the rules to suit them.
So CM:
Though at a tangent I would question the idea of a measure of a charge of 2e before we were around
Care to elaborate?
