Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 20:09:02 UTC No. 16193022

>>16193015
Anything beyond natural numbers. Math went wrong when we started talking about zero.

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 20:48:16 UTC No. 16193074

>>16193022
checked

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 20:53:49 UTC No. 16193082

royal and priestly inbreeding
Inbreed for long enough and things get weird, very weird.

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 20:58:49 UTC No. 16193093

>>16193015
The idea that we were actually born and will someday die is too bizarre to think about. There's no logical reason for any of this to occur.

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 22:16:01 UTC No. 16193224

>>16193022
>Uhhhh I have zero
zero what?
>UHHHHH JUST ZERO OK!!! REDDIT BACK ME UP
zero is schizo nonsense

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 22:32:04 UTC No. 16193252

>>16193015
>environmental science and natural resources
Plants and fungi cooperate through mycorrhizal connections in the soil and “speak” in a way we are just beginning to notice and aren’t close to understanding. From our perspective they are unthinking organisms that simply “are” with no reasoning or logic, but there is evidence that they form communities and collaborate for the continued survival of these communities. Hippies will tell you that “we’re all connected man” but what if, through the damage we are inflicting on our environment, we are actually being labeled as outsiders? What if these communities learn our biological weaknesses and strike us down? Or, what if we are more connected than we realize, and are actually being controlled or pushed in some way? Imagine the soil, the fungi, the plants acting as a world-spanning super computer with a consciousness so complex and different from ours that we have no way of controlling it or understanding it. Fungi need corpses to eat, and they share the nutrients they receive with plants. Are we growing plants or are plants growing us?

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 22:36:35 UTC No. 16193259

>>16193252
>Are we growing plants or are plants growing us?
As an avid gardener, I've often wondered if my plants emit mind controlling spores to reprogram me into being their caretaker.

Fungal networks are pretty damn cool though, and they are being used to build networks that can deliver nutrients to roots, even through dense clay based soils.

Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 22:40:17 UTC No. 16193265

>>16193259
It’s been eye opening to learn about. Like how Japan used slime mold to reroute trains more efficiently. I work in the woods and I always feel more like a guest than a caretaker. If cats can give us parasites that make us love them, and do that on accident, what can fungi do on purpose?

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 07:42:08 UTC No. 16193716

>>16193015
Real numbers

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 08:01:02 UTC No. 16193738

>>16193716
>MUH CAUCHY SEQUENCES!!!
not even cattle farms have that much bullshit

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 08:06:00 UTC No. 16193747

Everything about parapsychology. /x/ knows about it obviously but normie scientists will cope and sneed even though its experimental data is rock solid. Of course this reveals that they have an ideological philosophy of science bias, not a science problem as such.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 08:43:00 UTC No. 16193779

>what is the most schizo bullshit thing about your field that no sane person can believe
>physicists: most advanced and complicated part of their field
>mathematicians: most basic and foundational part of their field
why is it like this?

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 09:06:58 UTC No. 16193795

>>16193779
Math is a psyop

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 09:08:01 UTC No. 16193796

>>16193716
What's the diagnol of a square tho

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 10:01:03 UTC No. 16193867

Evopsych. Conjectures upon conjectures, about as predictive as a tarot reading, and of course it's the one thing that both IFLS redditards and poltards both agree on.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 10:12:35 UTC No. 16193893

>>16193867
Evopsych makes depressed men feel better about themselves

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 11:06:40 UTC No. 16193970

Whatchu guys think about this?
https://jaysanalysis.com/2013/10/26/numbers-prove-god/

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 14:20:53 UTC No. 16194187

>>16193970
>https://jaysanalysis.com/2013/10/26/numbers-prove-god/
Schizo

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 14:49:17 UTC No. 16194208

>>16193970
>https://jaysanalysis.com/2013/10/26/numbers-prove-god/
Ugh. Unreadable. I passed it to an AI to see if it could boil the page down to a concise argument, but all it got to was "numbers are invariant therefore God," basically. At best, it's all just schizo rambling.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 15:19:45 UTC No. 16194247

>>16193093
There doesn't have to be a reason. It just is.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 15:21:14 UTC No. 16194249

>>16193015
The Portuguese Man-o-War is not a single individual animal, it's a colony. Its cells are capable of free life out in the sea but they tag along to form the 3 different tissues of the colony: the sail which they inflate with gas, the digestive tentacles in the middle, and the defensive tentacles that shoot harpoons with poison.

Also starfish are headless conjoined quintuplets, and we share a closer common ancestor with them than with worms or insects.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 15:23:27 UTC No. 16194254

>>16193252
Bro the trees can't think, fungi-tree communication is no different than your stomach making acid when something touches it.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 15:30:41 UTC No. 16194263

>>16193779
Physics was only able to comprehend the more esoteric parts of reality once physicists were able to detach from common sense later on, because physics is a scientific pursuit before an intellectual one, so examples such as magnetic forces acting perpendicularly would be realized later because instinct causes people to disregard such ideas. Math was never as based in reality, so mathematicians could find the weird stuff early without their instincts and common sense fighting against them. Mathematicians realized in the 1600s what physicists realized in the 1900s.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 16:16:39 UTC No. 16194325

>>16194254
The thing is we don’t know. The signals could just be “if strength x for food signal then grow” or they could be much more complex signals of growth and development based on a range of factors mixed into intelligent decision making. Now we could test this by seeing how plants and fungi grow together in a vacuum under differing stimuli, but perhaps the thinking is an emergent phenomenon requiring more biomass.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 17:02:10 UTC No. 16194377

>>16194325
Bro, what are you even talking about.

It's clear that at a symbiotic level the fungi will allocate resources here and there where he feels the tree and allows him to grow better. This is basic cellular signalling. Maybe the tree can diffuse hormones through the fungus network. What you are suggesting is that the fungus itself is an excitable tissue and that the tree also has a signal processing organ like a brain. This isn't happening man, it's just vegetative growth here and there.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 19:17:30 UTC No. 16194573

>>16193796
That would be a set of rational numbers strictly less than the length of the diagonal. B-but I want a number! Nope, you get an infinite set of them, just trust me goy.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 20:17:56 UTC No. 16194659

>>16193224
zero is the absence of a number, its literally not that hard to concptualize

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 21:03:47 UTC No. 16194717

>>16194659
1 tree, 1 bird, an easy correspondence. Now compare 0 trees to 0 birds. HUH? Wuuuut? This is where math enters the dark realm of mysticism and black magic.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 00:21:45 UTC No. 16195028

>>16194717
0 is the number of bitches you have

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 01:21:04 UTC No. 16195096

>>16195028
2! = 2 x 1 = 2
1! = 1 x 1 = 1
0! = 0 x 0 = 0 ... yet we're told 0! = 1.

Do I have 0! bitches or 0 bitches? Zero ain't shieeeeet.

1^0 = 1
0^0 = ???????*??????????
0^(0!) = 0 aaiiighh yooo wtf these crackas be trippin.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 01:22:32 UTC No. 16195100

>>16195096
>0! = 0 x 0 = 0
Excuse me my good sirs, it was clearly an oversight on the part of myself to have not written this correctly as:
>0! = 0 x 1 = 0

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 03:08:38 UTC No. 16195196

I think general purpose computing is a form of magic. Not in the "le sufficiently advanced technology is magic" way, I mean in the definition of the word magic. A well understood scientific explanation and something being magic are not mutually exclusive. General purpose computing and its implications are completely unprecedented at its core. It's not just an electronically driven abacus that runs a billion times a second. The conscious mind has abstracted out the fundamentals of nature (in this case, electrons/electricity) and has essentially figured out a way to exploit it in an intentional and ARBITRARY fashion. This has never been done before.

The "arbitrary exploitation" aspect is the magical part. There is nothing before general purpose computing that allowed arbitrary change of its functionality by way of giving it different instructions, and then letting the exploitation of nature do the leg work. We've essentially created a Jewish golem in-a-box.

I don't think I'm romanticizing it to the point of delusion. People take it for granted because it's so commonplace in modern life. Digital computers have been around for a relatively short amount of time, and already we are discussing the philosophical implications of AGI and "when is a machine considered to be alive and conscious?". There is something fundamental to this technology that goes beyond "just a glorified calculator". We have a machine that can look at a photo and tell you what the subject matter of the photo is with a high degree of accuracy by exploiting a ton of electrons in specific ways - it's magic. I don't give a fuck if it's a redditor take.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 05:18:04 UTC No. 16195301

>>16194659
It actually is since any time you positively define something based on its own lack of existence, you set up a linguistic paradox such as the paradox of the valueless value, in the case of zero.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 05:28:21 UTC No. 16195312

>>16193015
Consensus.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 05:43:45 UTC No. 16195322

>>16193867
This. It’s one of the most evil fields of study. Nothing good can come if it.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 05:57:12 UTC No. 16195329

>>16194249
oh, interesting, are there other symbiotic relations to that extent?

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 06:04:18 UTC No. 16195334

>>16195096
>yet we're told 0! = 1.
yes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_product
and the number of ways of arranging nothing, te fact that you though this was a gotcha really shows that you believe pic related(from page 18 in https://tcotlc.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/OTOET_PREVIEW_062_October_03_2021.pdf ), jesus christ, imagine getting filtered by identity elements

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 06:06:15 UTC No. 16195335

>>16195196
>"when is a machine considered to be alive and conscious?".
if that even gets to be, them's digifucks should not be given the vote

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 06:07:17 UTC No. 16195336

>>16195322
>Nothing good
for who?

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 06:10:43 UTC No. 16195339

>>16195334
So you are claiming that nothing is something and there is a particular way to arrange it?

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 06:17:11 UTC No. 16195349

The unified equation is simply numbers averaging locally and simultaneously and this can be simulated in a matrix calculator as simple as MS Excel. It cannot be unseen once seen and I'm not smart enough to know why the idea is not explored by academia.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 06:21:00 UTC No. 16195352

>>16195334
No one here posting is getting filtered. You got baited.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 12:13:31 UTC No. 16195693

>>16195322
Only if your ethical system has no basis in reality, which is of course maladaptive.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 12:20:53 UTC No. 16195702

>>16194377
Plantposter detected. Stop attempting to dissemble. We're on to you.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 12:46:38 UTC No. 16195725

>>16195329
you see similar things in siphonophores in general
the man-o'-war is just the best-known member of the order by far

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 14:00:32 UTC No. 16195803

>>16195693
Found the poltard