🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:21:00 UTC No. 16518869
If 2+2=5 is a thing that doesn’t exist, then how is it possible for me to think of it?
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 08:36:43 UTC No. 16518870
>>16518869
2+2=5 mod 1
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 09:36:25 UTC No. 16518891
>>16518869
You have no friends or family and are alone for the holidays so you post troll crap for attention. People like you are often mentally ill, which explains your behavior.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 09:42:21 UTC No. 16518897
>>16518891
this applies to you as well
Barkon !.jBm2mJIk2 at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 09:48:36 UTC No. 16518901
>2+2=4
Source?
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 09:59:22 UTC No. 16518910
>>16518901
https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmse
>The complete proof of 2 + 2 = 4 involves 2,913 subtheorems
>These have a total of 26,323 steps—this is how many steps you would have to examine if you wanted to verify the proof by hand in complete detail all the way back to the axioms of ZFC set theory.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:07:17 UTC No. 16518915
>>16518869
>>16518910
Let [math]2,4\in\mathbb{C}[/math]:
https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmse
>The complete proof of [math]2 + 2 = 4[/math] involves 2,913 subtheorems
>These have a total of 26,323 steps—this is how many steps you would have to examine if you wanted to verify the proof by hand in complete detail all the way back to the axioms of ZFC set theory.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:09:19 UTC No. 16518917
>>16518901
Let [math]2,4\in\mathbb{C}[/math]:
https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/mmse
>The complete proof of 2+2=4 involves 2,913 subtheorems
>These have a total of 26,323 steps—this is how many steps you would have to examine if you wanted to verify the proof by hand in complete detail all the way back to the axioms of ZFC set theory.
Barkon !.jBm2mJIk2 at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:36:11 UTC No. 16518931
>>16518917
What's the source of that source? Sounds like crackademic symbol spastication.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:38:17 UTC No. 16518933
>>16518869
If the billion dollars in your bank account doesn't exist how come you can think about it
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:39:19 UTC No. 16518935
>>16518869
Demonic influence
Barkon !.jBm2mJIk2 at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:53:32 UTC No. 16518944
>>16518933
If the fag who made this post doesn't come into account, who posted it? And more to the point, why is this fag posting at all if all he posts is gay shit? Beats me. It must be 2+2=5
Barkon !.jBm2mJIk2 at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:58:16 UTC No. 16518946
>>16518944
Question: are all 2s the same? Is every 2 equal to simple 2 1s, or can there be a complex 2, free of 1?
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:59:10 UTC No. 16518947
>>16518931
>What's the source of that source?
I will answer a related question with a source, what is Metamath?
>Metamath: A Computer Language for Mathematical Proofs
https://us.metamath.org/downloads/m
Barkon !.jBm2mJIk2 at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 11:01:00 UTC No. 16518948
>>16518947
Horse poo, is the source of that.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 11:03:00 UTC No. 16518949
>>16518869
If gjguhuggiguffc5r is a thing that dosen't exist, how is it possible for me to spell it?
Barkon !.jBm2mJIk2 at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 11:06:09 UTC No. 16518950
>>16518949
That's because it does exist, each letter contains meaning.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 12:24:02 UTC No. 16519003
>>16518869
u can't, those r just symbols, can u really imagine a 4 but 5 things?(i can't even think about it)
can u imagine a squarded circle? u can't
u didn't think of it. bc u can't and those r just symbols
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:01:22 UTC No. 16519546
I can think of fucking ops mom up the ass in front of him right now but this doesnt exist, how is it possible for me to think of it?
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:39:11 UTC No. 16519564
>>16518869
2.35+2.35=4.7
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:45:50 UTC No. 16519571
>>16518869
Platonism is really this retarded
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:51:04 UTC No. 16519577
>>16518869
Anon, that is just a bunch of symbols. Some arrangements make sense, others not. You can also redefine what operation such symbol represents. Instead addition it could multiply both operands and add one to the result. Of course doing that is not recommended because people would chimp out at you.
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:58:04 UTC No. 16519585
>>16518869
If you can't think of things that don't exist, how can you think of things not existing?
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 01:00:08 UTC No. 16519588
>>16518869
You can hallucinate about anything you want and it will exist in your head.
The bigger question is about which things exist in the heads of other persons.
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 01:03:58 UTC No. 16519591
>>16518869
Are you conceptualizing the image of the complete equation or imagining a scenario in which combining 2 and 2 generate an artificial output greater than their individual sums?
How are (You) arriving at 5 specifically?
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 07:45:01 UTC No. 16519852
>>16518869
Because its perfectly valid, you just can't intermix the system you made with common mathematic parlance and notation because then it would be invalid.
the one mirror sees itsself at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 09:01:18 UTC No. 16519881
>>16518869
Math is a mental construct, not reality, and that we can do this math is proof that this all is a digital reality.
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 12:04:39 UTC No. 16519980
>>16518869
ideas are not bound to the laws of physics
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 12:23:30 UTC No. 16519996
>>16518869
It exists in the set of wrong things in math
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 12:54:26 UTC No. 16520007
>>16519980
How? Aren’t ideas created by our neural system which fallows the laws of physics?