Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Physical proof that infinity isn't real

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 16:32

Physicist frequently use infinity when talking about fields (ex. V = integral of E*dr from 0 to infinity) but if the fields were infinite, be they gravitational or electric, they would span the entire universe and all things effected by it would collapse into a single, crushing point. This has clearly not happened and is not happening. QED, infinity is not real.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 21:58

>>40
ie it is not finite unless you round off some digits
For fuck's sake, are you braindead?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#The_dichotomy_paradox
^^
As expected from the chief retard officer of /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 22:01

>>40
Let me guess, 1/3 is now bigger than aleph_0 and all those kike numbers because the decimal representation is infinite.

Good god, I'd wish you were ``trolling''.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 22:21

sorry, for s(n = infinity)...
mhm, i've read something similar before, except that link is a little different.. and i don't quite get the point of that one. Obviously the faster runner will overtake the slower one, if neither speed up nor slow down..
The one i've heard is that A is 3 blocks behind B, B travels 1 block per A travels 3, and at each corner(?), the speed of A & B drops to 1/3 the current speed, with corners at 3, 1, 1/3, 1/9, ... so A never catches B
Can you prove that there is an upper bound, given the sum of the series will forever be increasing..?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 22:29

>>43
What the fuck does the Zeno's dichotomy paradox have to do with runners? 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/timeline/5243df3119ebc8f7c539b9686bf51869.png
This fucking image right here, do you thick motherfucker even understand the image?

Could you please read carefully next time, instead of carelessly spouting shit you don't even know about?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 22:47

>The Paradoxes of Motion
>Achilles and the tortoise...
Did you even look at the page you linked?

>The dichotomy paradox

Suppose Homer wants to catch a stationary bus. Before he can get there, he must get halfway there. Before he can get halfway there, he must get a quarter of the way there. Before traveling a quarter, he must travel one-eighth; before an eighth, one-sixteenth; and so on.

Since the distance to the bus is Finite, Homer can make it!

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 22:50

>>40,43

In some cases, yes, the series will remain bounded despite the fact that it is always increasing.

Consider a squirrel who is standing 10 feet from a pole. Every ten minutes, the squirrel moves halfway to the pole. The squirrel's distance from it's starting point is always increasing, yet it will never move past the pole.

For a more algebraic interpretation, consider the proof that s(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{n}(1/(2^{i})) is bounded.

Note that if r > 0, then you can do the following:

1 + r + r^2 + ... + r^{n-1} + r^n
= ((1 - r)/(1 - r)) (1 + r + r^2 + ... + r^{n-1} + r^n)
= (1/(1 - r)) ((1 - r)1 + (1 - r)r + (1 - r)r^2 + ... + (1 - r)r^{n-1} + (1 - r)r^n)
= (1/(1 - r)) ((1 - r) + (r - r^2) + (r^2 - r^3) + ... + (r^{n-1} - r^{n}) + (r^n - r^{n+1}))
= (1/(1 - r)) ((1 + -r) + (r + -r^2) + (r^2 + -r^3) + ... + (r^{n-1} + -r^n) + (r^n + -r^{n+1}))
= (1/(1 - r)) (1 + (-r + r) + (-r^2 + r^2) + (-r^3 + r^3) + ... + (-r^{n-1} + r^{n-1}) + (-r^n + r^n) + -r^{n+1})
= (1/(1 - r)) (1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + ... + 0 + 0 + -r^{n+1})
= (1/(1 - r)) (1 - r^{n+1})
= (1 - r^{n+1})/(1 - r)

So \sum_{i=0}^{n}(r^i) = (1 - r^{n+1})/(1 - r)

In the special case of r = (1/2), we have:

\sum_{i=0}^{n}((1/2)^i)
= (1 - (1/2)^{n+1})/(1 - (1/2))
= (1 - (1/2)^{n+1})/(1/2)
= 2(1 - (1/2)^{n+1})
= 2 - 2(1/2)^{n+1}
= 2 - 2/(2^{n+1})
= 2 - 1/(2^{n})

So we have a closed form expression:

s(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{n}(1/(2^i))
= 2 - 1/(2^n)

The the squirrel will never pass the pole, this series will never rise above 2. And we can prove it without talking about infinity:

0 <= n
1 <= 2^n
0 < 1/(2^n) <= 1
-1/(2^n) < 0
s(n) = 2 - 1/(2^n) < 2

So c = 2 works.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 22:58

It's a different thing, since you start with a finite number, and break it into an infinite number of fractions..
^^

Name: >>46 2013-01-27 23:03

>>47
What are you talking about? I never mentioned infinity. What is an ``infinite number of fractions''?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 23:13

1 <= 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 ...... is breaking a finite number into an infinite number of fractions, but since they are all fractions of a finite number, the answer too is Finite..
But yeah, you are probably right..
1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 + 1/25 ... may well be similar

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 23:19

But notice the difference? the first example is explicitly bounded, while the second isn't..

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 23:30

the question is, Does the second set decrease fast enough to be bounded?
If we look at the squirrel, he might take steps of 90%, which drops quickly 90%, 9%, 1%, ... or he may take steps of 1%, but i'm unsure if you have such a situation....

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 23:45

>>51

Now that you mention it, there might be a geometric interpretation.

\sum_{i=1}^{n}(1/i^2) is the squared length of the n dimensional vector, (1, 1/2, 1/3, ..., 1/n).

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 23:48

So... it should be bounded at 2..?
1/2 -> 50%
0.4/1 -> 40%
0.111 / 0.6 -> 18%
well, it looks ok, but if the % ever starts increasing then it's probably a deal-breaker ..

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-27 23:59

Another proof might be, that if the sum of the series 1/n is bounded, then the sum of the series 1 / n^2 must be..? or no?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:06

can 1/n^2 be bounded if 1/n isn't..?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:07

>>54

Yes, that would work, via the comparison test. Because each term of 1/n^2 is less than or equal to the corresponding term of 1/n, and all terms are positive, if 1/n is bounded then 1/n^2 must also be bounded. But that isn't going to work because 1/n isn't bounded.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:31

Shouldn't 1/n being unbounded imply 1/n^2 is also unbounded..? Perhaps not i guess, though it seems logical..

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:36

>>57
1/n^2 decreases way faster than 1/n

>>54
the harmonic series 1/n is unbounded, you learn this in your frist real analysis class

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:47

eg, if 1/n^2 is bounded at 2, then wouldn't 1/n be bounded at 4?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:51

...but not as fast as 1/2^n...

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 0:56

>>59

You can only do that if the operator is linear, so you can distribute across the terms, or factor it out from the sum.

So if sum(f(n)) converges to a, sum(c*f(n)) will converge to ca,

since c*f(1) + c*f(2) + c*f(3) + ... = c(f(1) + f(2) + f(3) + ...)

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 1:14

hmm, ah well that was fun, nice debating with you ^^
i wonder, does that mean the series 1/n^2 == 2/2^n ?

Name: >>61 2013-01-28 3:13

Oh, and it needs to be continuous as well.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 9:52

>>45
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#The_dichotomy_paradox
Dear fuck, please get the nigger dick out of your head. Why do you have to be so dense?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 9:53

>>45
The distance is increasing indefinitely. Please take a course on reading comprehension.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 10:02

>>49
1 <= 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 ...... is breaking a finite number into an infinite number of fractions
Put it the other way around. An infinite series of fractions is going to be put together into a single finite number, which is the upper bound.

If 2 = Σ02-n, then Σ02-n = 2, obviously.

So yes, an infinite series can be equal to a finite number. Not all of them are, though. You should read a book on integral calculus.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 10:44

>>66
Fuck calculus abstract bullshit

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 10:52

>>67
It's probably the least abstract part of college-level mathematics you'll ever see.

I'd say discrete mathematics are the least abstract, but that includes set theory and you ragheads will blame the kikes for your shitty life in the sand dunes of Al-Jihadatakaboom, so I won't do that.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 11:37

>>26
Money serve the function dopamine. I.e. money are the dopamine of hive mind. The problem isn't with emission process, but with goals. USA wages wars and wastes resources.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 12:09

>>68
Al-Jihadatakaboom
I fucking lel'd.

Name: >>68 2013-01-28 12:22

>>70
I don't like your irony.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 12:37

>>71
Don't you mean sarcasm?  Also, I genuinely found it amusing.

Name: Not >>68,71 2013-01-28 12:43

>>72
Sarcasm, irony, idiocy, trolling, all look same.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 13:08

Nikita Sadkov
I propose to form a task force of Serpukhov unusual and ambitious people, those who are smart and angry at the world - those who are called subjective idealists. If you did not go to school or where you bullied or you are unemployed or have someone hurt or objective values ​​you just alien and you do not feel in common with other people - write to me in private.
1
6 Dec at 4:13 am

Svetlana Shabaldina
Write, future monks madhouse named Nikita Sadkov!))))
Today at 2:39 am

Nikita Sadkov
Svetlana , someone should organize a potentially powerful people?
Three hours ago to Svetlana

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 13:11

>>74
As-salamu alaykum!

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 13:59

>>74
Oh Nikita! What are you doing, collecting a bunch of Russian degenerates? Why?

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 15:49

>>76
People who have little to lose can go to greater extends.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 16:26

This is an excellent idea. I like it.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-28 16:28

I hope they all meet in one place, that way we can use just one grenade.

Name: s I do) 2013-01-28 16:29

Common nigga, did you forget about the infint time?

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List