3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375 10582097494459230781640628620899862

[wil]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

nobody has ever seen an infinitely decimated irrational number and the physics here simply do not permit such an observation.

and while your insistence that the infinite does not exist to me is such great fun. This is even better. Since you can prove that if it does exist you couldn't see it, this is proof that it doesn't exist.

Mares eat oats and does eat oats and little lambs eat ivy, kids'll eat ivy to wouldn't ewe.

And since one can't rationalize with the irrational you make a horse drink, the tree doesn't make a sound and the bear uses a comode and bidet.

[_Z_]

hi tao

i like infinite pie it has no edges and can be eaten forever without loosing anything [well according to the hindu definition of infinity].

personally i think only infinity can be infinity and there cannot be more than one of them. neither can it be arrived at, pie as like infinite sets are not true infinities but pretenders to the throne.

count from 1 - 9 and keep going and you just get bigger and bigger numbers. however big they get there is an infinite amount remaining.

equally we cannot have an imagined infinite set where all numbers are present ~ so as to jump the paradox. a number represents a limit and infinity by definition is unlimited.

wherever there is 0 - 1 then 2, there must necessarily be something else between even if it is nothing.

happy pie day tao!

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

I'l keep my eye open, love QI ...and Fry's intellect. Thanks

Tao

No sweat. I love QI too.

Fry did a programme on BBC4 the other night on the Gutenberg press which was good.

The book is rather like QI in that it is a fine counterbalance to our tendency to rather lazily believe we know stuff when it is often the case that what we think we know is actually not true at all, or to some degree at least.

s.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

lol, no.. you can infinitely repeat that he is available but cannot once produce him for independent verification.

If you believe that I can infinitely repeat something then you believe in life after death.

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

You have faith, not evidence, no matter which way you try to spin it.
Tao

If you place faith in me then you will do as I ask with belief in me, or you will ask me to do something believing that I will with your best interest in mind. In both cases there is communication and there is ample evidence of me gained. So faith and evidence are NOT exclusive opposites. Faith in me is the method you might get to truly know me. If you have no communication with me whatsoever then you have NOT placed faith in me... you wouldn't even know whether or not I even existed. I could just be a computer program. You don't really know me until you have interacted with me. Even upon interacting with me a little you still don't fully know my will, intentions, or personality... you don't really know what I care about. But with time and interaction with me you could get to know me. Faith in me is in that interaction. Evidence of me is from that interaction.

Originally Posted by Snoopy

The book is rather like QI in that it is a fine counterbalance to our tendency to rather lazily believe we know stuff when it is often the case that what we think we know is actually not true at all, or to some degree at least.

There was a day that I lazily believed that I knew God was not really present in people's lives. I was wrong.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by wil

and while your insistence that the infinite does not exist to me is such great fun. This is even better. Since you can prove that if it does exist you couldn't see it, this is proof that it doesn't exist.

I've enjoyed the argument too. If you could interact with PI or infinity then I imagine you would prove they exist. I submit that we may agree that at least 'nothing' is infinte... that is if you could decimate something into an infinite number of pieces then each piece would be the size or the mass of nothing. Basic math. So then if 'nothing' conceptually exists then so does 'infinity'... in the same manner that so does 'Santa Claus' and all other manner of fiction. The concepts and the words do exist whether or not it is fact or fiction. Saying that 'nothing' is infinite is not to say that 'space' or a 'vacuum' is infinite either... rather it means that no space, no mass, no time, no force, no thing (or nothing) are infinite. Whether or not something in addition to 'nothing' is infinite is the argument but it is already firmly established that 'nothing' itself is in fact infinite. So then depending on your definition of 'exist'... I'd say that even Santa Claus does exist as fiction.

Originally Posted by _Z_

personally i think only infinity can be infinity and there cannot be more than one of them. neither can it be arrived at, pie as like infinite sets are not true infinities but pretenders to the throne.

The infinite decimation of an irrational number suggests infinite detail. Kind of like a mandelbrot set... you could allegedly keep zooming in forever and find ever finer detail.

My point essentially is that if I could live here another 100 billion years and I spent every second of every day zooming into the mandelbrot set or calculating the next digit in PI with every supercomputer at my disposal, or merely counting the seconds as they went by... I'd still be working with finite numbers with a finite lifespan here and a finite mandelbrot set and a finite PI. It is an error to suggest otherwise. Nothing in this world has been found to have infinite detail or any attribute that is infinite. Not even the speed of light.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

There was a day that I lazily believed that I knew God was not really present in people's lives. I was wrong.

Exactly: strive to never be lazy!

s.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Exactly: strive to never be lazy!

In the imagination of math within any range of numbers: (# of irrational numbers / # of rational numbers) = Infinity

In the real world, for any collection of numbers: (# of irrational numbers / # of rational numbers) = 0

Why?

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

If you believe that I can infinitely repeat something then you believe in life after death.

I thought you quite bright enough to distinguish between a turn of phrase and a statement of fact......do I really have to be so careful with you?

If you place faith in me then you will do as I ask with belief in me,

Sorry buddy, not in the market for a guru at the moment

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

In the imagination of math within any range of numbers: (# of irrational numbers / # of rational numbers) = Infinity

In the real world, for any collection of numbers: (# of irrational numbers / # of rational numbers) = 0

Why?

I think you must be confusing me with someone else.

s.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

I think you must be confusing me with someone else.

Someone who cares? I asked you a question but you are free to ignore it.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Someone who cares? I asked you a question but you are free to ignore it.

Cares about what?

OK here's an answer:

I don't know. Do tell.

s.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Sorry buddy, not in the market for a guru at the moment

A guru? If and when you seek God then you will find the guru. In the meantime seek to place faith in even the least of people. A guru? Wow that was revealing.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Cares about what?

OK here's an answer:

I don't know. Do tell.

s.

Tell you what? I may have confused you with someone else.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Tell you what?

In the imagination of math within any range of numbers: (# of irrational numbers / # of rational numbers) = Infinity

In the real world, for any collection of numbers: (# of irrational numbers / # of rational numbers) = 0

Why?

I may have confused you with someone else.

Only you can say.

s.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Only you can say.

False, but I can say: I was asking you. I was also asking anyone else who wanted to consider the question.