Think about it... how can you have 3 equal parts of an object? The decimate representation is impossible and one side always has to be bigger then the other. This is also why there is no such thing as 360 equal degrees in a circle as one degree has to be off by a little bit... There are no 360 numbers that will add up to 1 whole object either.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-07 19:38
Your math professors must be dumb as hell. If I have three cm3 of water, and I divide that into three exact parts, I have three separate cm3 of water. Explain that, please?
with your logic division by anything is impossible just because of the lack of exactness in practical application... conclusion your retarded
Name:
LordRiordan2006-12-08 11:59
Re:1
Try getting exactly cm3 of water and we will talk.
Divison is impossible if you want perfection. It only works because it appears to be close enough for your eye to detect or whatever tool you are using. Not only do you start off with a unit that is off, say 3cm of water, but dividing it is rather useless. Im just saying division by 3 outside of paper doesn't really exist.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-08 13:18
i have 3 apples, i divide them between 3 people, each getting 1 apple. THEY STOP EXISTING! OH SHI-
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-08 13:42
No human or god can match
Nature's simultaneous 4 day
rotation in 1 Earth rotation.
No human has a right to
believe wrong - for that
would be evil thinking.
Ignorance of 4 days is evil,
Evil educators teach 1 day.
1 day will destroy humans.
OPPOSITES CREATE.
Mother and father gave me birth, not a queer jew god.
Singularity god is EVIL as
Creation reigns as Opposites.
Educators, and You - ought
to be killed for ignoring the
fact that "Earth is Cubed".
(ignored and suppressed by EVIL educators)
NASA's Moon Landing was
far less of an achievement
than Time Cube discovery,
for I have Cubed the Earth,
with 4 simultaneous corner
days in 1 rotation of Earth.
(singularity belief scientist can't comprehend T.O.E.)
God SINGULARITY and the
academic taught singularity
constitute great evils in the
Cubic World of Opposites -
Opposites hemispheres and
Opposite sexes of humanity.
The Universe is composed
of Opposites - existing only
as Opposites - with a zero
value existence - cancelling
to nothing as a singularity.
>>44
Why do you talk about 3? Do you think division by 2 exists outside of paper? How about division by 17?
Name:
LordRiordan2006-12-09 17:34
Because you have have exactly 50% of two objects but not 33.3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-09 18:54
decimal numbers are never accurate.
x/3 is the accuarate way.
I think you are all missing the point. its ~1/3, never 1/3. It does not exist... much like a perfect circle.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-09 23:08
By God, Jasper, I've discovered math is merely an abstraction!
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-10 1:26
>>56
I think you're missing the point.
In base 3, 1/3 = 0.1
In base 3, 1/2 = 0.1111111111111111111111.....
By your logic, 1/2 exists since we can write it in base 10. But in base 3, a different but still perfectly reasonable choice of bases, we can not write it. Similarly you claim 1/3 does not exist since we can't write it in base 10, but we can in base 3. Your entire "theory" of which numbers do and do not exist (or rather, which numbers we can and can not divide by) is built upon a faulty assumption that base 10 is the only base.
Re:58 You fail because they aren't the same porportion of a whole object. It has nothing to do with the base but the porportion of the object which, in base 10, division by 3 which is impossible.
Re: 60
1/3 in a 10 base is not the same as 1/3 in another base.
Re: 61
Thats nice but Im talking about one whole object divided into 3 sperate ones, not 3 objects divided by 3.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-10 16:55
>>62
Fine, if you are going to be a jackass and apply abstractions to the real world, then please give us an example of "one whole object" that can be divided by 3. I mean you must be the sole possessor of the complete knowledge of the exact composition of matter to make these assumptions.
1/3 is 1/3 in any base. just because something is infinitely long doesn't mean it doesn't exist. pi exists. are you going to dispute the existence of a circle? as a circle is defined as all the points equidistant from a certain point in a 2 dimensional plane, any point in space has a circle around it. so the ratio between the circumference and the diameter exists.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-10 19:22
>>62
1/3 is the multiplicative of 3 in any base. Numbers are not different solely because they are written in another base.
Name:
LordRiordan2006-12-10 19:55
Re:63 One whole object can be anything. An apple. You still can't divide into into perfect 3s, its mathematically impossible. Pi "exists" in that itll make a circle as close to perfect without it actually being perfect.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-11 2:36
>>66
Okay then let's take that apple, it may take me an extremely long time, but I could split the atoms that make up that apple into 3 equal sized groups. The number of molecules isn't divisible by 3? Fine, I'll break the remainder of molecules up into groups of atoms and give the groups an equal number of those. The number of atoms isn't divisible by 3? Fine, I'll break up the atoms into subatomic particles, and give the groups an equal number of those. The number of subatomic particles isn't divisible by 3? Fine, I'll break up the subatomic particles into quarks and gluons, and give the groups an equal number of those. I can keep going, unless you know something no one else does about what makes up these particles and why they couldn't be divided.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-11 11:22
>>66
To give a shorter and meaner response than >>67, what makes you believe that everything is divisible by two?
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-11 11:23
>>68
Oh shit I forgot the mean.
You're an inbred halfwit.
Name:
LordRiordan2006-12-11 13:01
Re: 67
Might be applicable on paper but doesnt apply to us in real life. Just like unicorns, fairys, and gay marriage. Id like to see you get exact measurements in weight and size for those molecules you speak of and splitting them to be exactly equal.
Name:
LordRiordan2006-12-11 13:03
Re: 68
I never said that? Now that I think about it I don't think that is practicle either.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-11 13:37
all atoms have the same weight (at least, as long as they are the same isotope). they would be made of the same "stuff" -- the same number of protons, electrons, and neutrons. if they have the same stuff then they are the same weight. break it down further and itll still be the same -- all subatomic particles that have the same properties are going to have the same mass. there won't be any difference between the masses and sizes between two electrons.
And in response to >>70, what the fuck are you talking about, you are the one trying to apply abstractions to real life. You have no evidence that it is impossible to break an object down into 3 equal parts, and your claim is based on some flawed logic about how 1/3 results in a repeating decimal in base 10. I'm not sure you actually know what a molecule is if you don't think it could be broken down, by the way.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-11 16:26
>>70
The point I was trying to make is that somewhere along the line, something will be divisible by 3. For example, you have 1 apple, but maybe there are 3 million molecules, or 300 million atoms, or 3 billion subatomic particles, and so on. It may take an extraordinary amount of time and effort to separate them into equal groupings, but it is possible. Also, you can't dispute that this could go on infinitely until you hit something divisible by 3, unless you have absolute proof that quarks aren't made of smaller particles, which no one does.
Name:
LordRiordan2006-12-14 3:53
If it exists then how come it can't be represented by numbers? 1/3 = .3333333333333x3 = .9999999999999 which is not equal to one whole object.
Re: 72
Yea theres no argument against that. However, you are disregarding the existance of a quantom dot which comes into and out of existance within quarks. This causes a super rapid flux in weight which by itself makes division impossible. Even if you cannot divide it up into weight, you cannot divide the QDots as they are constantly changing.
Re: 76
You can't give an example that there is an object with exactly enough particles to be divided by 3. Also read my reponse to 72 which makes it impossible to divide these objects anyways.