🧵 WHY DIDN'T WE LISTEN?
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 01:05:32 UTC No. 16087393
>"On August 10, 1632, five men in flowing black robes convened in a somber Roman palazzo to pass judgment on a deceptively simple proposition: that a continuous line is composed of distinct and infinitely tiny parts. With the stroke of a pen the Jesuit fathers banned the doctrine of infinitesimals, announcing that it could never be taught or even mentioned. The concept was deemed dangerous and subversive, a threat to the belief that the world was an orderly place, governed by a strict and unchanging set of rules. If infinitesimals were ever accepted, the Jesuits feared, the entire world would be plunged into chaos"
>PLUNGED INTO CHAOS
Were the Jesuits right all along?
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 04:26:39 UTC No. 16087579
bump
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:03:57 UTC No. 16087601
>>16087393
We did listen for about 300 years.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:13:47 UTC No. 16087606
>>16087393
If .999... = 1 doesn't that mean that an infinitesimal is exactly equal to 0 since 1-.999...=0?
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 07:06:55 UTC No. 16087688
>>16087393
amir alexander seems to be rather stupid. he starts the book presenting church resistance to atomism as resistance to the notion of infinitesimals, since he cannot tell the difference.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 08:06:59 UTC No. 16087728
>>16087606
they never equal
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 08:15:26 UTC No. 16087737
>>16087728
Then why does 1/3 (ie .333..) + 1/3 + 1/3 equal exactly 3/3 ie 1?
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:30:14 UTC No. 16088112
>>16087393
BTFOd: https://www.amazon.com/review/R27I6
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 15:43:05 UTC No. 16088207
>>16087737
.333... is not exactly 1/3
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 15:44:24 UTC No. 16088208
>>16087737
It doesn't, it's just one of the kinks of the base 10
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:47:48 UTC No. 16088285
>>16088207
it is tho
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 01:26:10 UTC No. 16088941
>>16088112
lawlz
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 01:57:05 UTC No. 16088964
>>16088207
Yeah 2+2 isn't 4 but 0.333 is 1/3
Welcome to r/math friendo!
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 06:21:56 UTC No. 16089124
>>16088964
4 is divisible by 2, 10 is not divisible by 3
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 06:45:45 UTC No. 16089138
>>16087393
Without infinitesimal infinity there's no such thing as free will. One would think christcucks would have been all over the idea. Or maybe they thought only the soul could be infinitely divisible while the world was mechanistic.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:14:01 UTC No. 16089155
>>16087737
1/3 and 0.333 arent equal dumbass
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 08:37:35 UTC No. 16089223
>>16087606
>>16087737
>An interesting thread immediately derailed by the same old stupid shit
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:07:04 UTC No. 16089240
They were 100% right. Infinitesimals are to math as smartphones are to the internet. It's too much power for normies.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:21:48 UTC No. 16089244
>>16087393
Why do you expect serious answers on a board which is 99% inhabited by schizos, retards, ESLs and pajeets? The only reason for the 1% of educated and rational English speaking people to post here is to troll and shit on the 99% for their own entertainment.
But yes, they were right. And the day will come when those GOD CURSED INFINITY LOVING SODOMITES are put to the sword in the name of all that is good, decent, and Holy. Amen.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:23:48 UTC No. 16089319
>>16087728
x = 0.9999999...
10x = 9.9999999...
10x - x = 9
9x = 9
x = 1
0.99999... has to equal 1 for arithmetic to work. Its okay if you don't believe in it or like it, its practically inconsequential, like cardinality of infinites.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:53:55 UTC No. 16089396
>>16089244
> educated and rational
> native English speakers
Mutt hands typed this
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 14:29:36 UTC No. 16089463
>>16087393
>Im a Jew and not happy with the Status Quo
Many such cases
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 15:05:32 UTC No. 16089506
>>16089319
Does this proof work in reverse, or if either of the terms are substituted at any time?
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 17:09:45 UTC No. 16089642
>>16089506
>Does this proof work in reverse
Yes, because 0.999... = 1
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 19:42:22 UTC No. 16089837
>>16087393
should i read this?
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 19:46:09 UTC No. 16089842
>>16089837
That's the beauty of citations. You don't have to!
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 20:12:24 UTC No. 16089874
>>16087393
>>16087606
an infinitesimal can cause 0 to read negative. this approximation is called... negative zero.
step 1) 9 * -infinitesimal = 0 + nine negative infinitesimals
step 2) -0 * infinity = -9
owO where did that come from
well infinitesimals are just another number plane, much like i, one that bonds to four different places: infinity, zero, negative zero, and negative infinity. when a number disappears from the number plane, maybe it isn't infinitely large, or infinitely small... maybe the multiplier it was hit with was so forceful it sent the number hurdling into a different dimension....... spooooky