We assume the natural numbers are infinite.

We assume the natural numbers are infinite. If we introduce a greater infinity, to count the natural numbers, we can assume in the same way that they are counted. However, to recite all the natural numbers in 'finite time' is impossible.

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >We assume the natural numbers are infinite
    They are, you can just make up an infinite amount of numbers
    >this is the peak of namegay intelligence

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      True, and greater orders of infinity or cardinality is also insane. Georg Cantor was simply wrong with that.

      >They are, you can just make up an infinite amount of numbers
      You can just make shit up?
      So what story writers do.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >You can just make shit up?
        Numbers are made up and don't correspond to any physical object in reality, they are abstract objects in mathematical space

        • 1 month ago
          Barkon

          And you're a moron, and that wasn't made up. It's the opposite of infinity - it's the cage of your mind.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Maybe if you spent less time drooling on your keyboard we would have less moronic threads on sci

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Numbers are made up
          Lol, so you think the number of Protons in a hydrogen atom is "made up"?
          You think the distance between the moon and the Earth is "made up"?
          How do you even remember to breath?
          seriously.

          Maybe if you spent less time drooling on your keyboard we would have less moronic threads on sci

          >Maybe if you spent less time drooling on your keyboard we would have less moronic threads on sci
          Do you have five eyes anon?
          numbers are just made up remember?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This guy

            https://i.imgur.com/Qtmw3RI.jpeg

            >You can just make shit up?
            Numbers are made up and don't correspond to any physical object in reality, they are abstract objects in mathematical space

            gets it. The number of protons in a hydrogen atom is not made up. Numbers are made up. Example was written by one (1) idiot. The number is made up and defined such that it works within out mathematical set of constraints. This doesnt change anything about the count of idiots it takes to write a post. Numbers are symbols made up to enable expression of observations.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The number of protons in a hydrogen atom is not made up
            But you're saying it is dumbfrick lol.

            https://i.imgur.com/v9wzBWc.png

            >Lol, so you think the number of Protons in a hydrogen atom is "made up"?
            >You think the distance between the moon and the Earth is "made up"?
            Neither of those things are made of numbers or have a quantitative representation in the information field of reality, because reality isn't a quantitative system, unless you're some simulation hypothesis schizo, numbers and quantities are abstract constructs in isolated systems constructed to imitate physical phenomena in mathematical space, the numbers themselves are not made of anything nor is anything made of numbers, it's as made up as any other human language, that's why you can use mathematical systems to construct things that don't exist, it's all made up

            >Neither of those things are made of numbers
            So you have ten eyes in your head?
            You're so astoundingly stupid anon.
            I can shoot ten bullets into your head and you won't die because it's just a non-existent number?
            Want to test that out anon?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Brother, are you literally moronic? Have you really been this filtered by basic arithmetic that you are having map-territory problems with counting? Jesus Christ man.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Lol, so you think the number of Protons in a hydrogen atom is "made up"?
            >You think the distance between the moon and the Earth is "made up"?
            Neither of those things are made of numbers or have a quantitative representation in the information field of reality, because reality isn't a quantitative system, unless you're some simulation hypothesis schizo, numbers and quantities are abstract constructs in isolated systems constructed to imitate physical phenomena in mathematical space, the numbers themselves are not made of anything nor is anything made of numbers, it's as made up as any other human language, that's why you can use mathematical systems to construct things that don't exist, it's all made up

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >the numbers themselves are not made of anything nor is anything made of numbers, it's as made up as any other human language, that's why you can use mathematical systems to construct things that don't exist, it's all made up
            Lol, that doesn't follow at all you stupid imbecile.
            Obama is the name for somebody that exists.
            It's describing something that exists.
            I can make up a name for somebody that doesn't exist but it isn't the name of a real person.

            Same with mathematics. Real mathematics counts, quantifies and describes relationships between things that actually exist.

            I can imagine numbers or principles for things that don't exist but it isn't actual mathematics because it isn't describing anything real.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Obama is the name for somebody that exists.
            >It's describing something that exists.
            And yet the word obama doesn't exist in the information field of reality and isn't made of anything, show me where all the obamas are in a hydrogen atom

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >And yet the word obama doesn't exist in the information field of reality
            What in the absolute frick are you talking about. It's information held in people's brains and it's the name of somebody that actually exists.
            Every aspect of it is material.

            >show me where all the obamas are in a hydrogen atom
            Holy shit anon, are you a fricking Christ-tard?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            > It's information held in people's brains
            Except this information is not made of words or numbers, because words and numbers don't physically exist, there are no obama words zipping around your brain
            >it's the name of somebody that actually exists
            It's a made up nomenclature of an abstract figure in a specific linguistic framework, there are no names or numbers in any of the infinitesimal constituents making up that person, because reality is not made of words and numbers

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            Cum - is made up - it doesn't make it any less real.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >lose argument
            >instantly start talking about cum
            OP is a homosexual as always

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            Awwwwww

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            the number 1 is a concrete representation of something that exists. You can take any one thing in real life and say that it corresponds to one. Numbers aren't made the frick up, they're representations that came from trying to rationalize and describe reality. There is no chicken and egg with math you fricking moron. Reality came first, then people, then numbers. Want to know how that works? Because one corresponds to one object, 2 corresponds to 2 objects, and the entire abstract framework of mathematics is derived and builds upon the fundamental observable principles of reality.

            Yours is such a stupid fricking argument because you think you can confuse everyone and look smart by handwaving language as if it's all made the frick up. It's not, and if it was, we wouldn't fricking exist. Even your thoughts are fricking real. Ever think of that? Your thoughts are actual physical things traveling along actual physical power lines connected to each other. Some of those actual physical things came together to understand that the number one is a real fricking thing. Even animals can understand this. You are dumber than a fricking horse. You are less than an animal.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Except this information is not made of words or numbers
            Lol, NO FRICKING SHIT ANON.
            YES CAPTAIN OBVIOUS . NOBODY IS SAYING THAT.
            >because words and numbers don't physically exist,
            WRONG!!! THOSE WORDS AND NUMBERS ARE ENCODED AS NEURAL STATES IN A PHYSICAL BRAIN! OK! THEY DESCRIBE THINGS THAT EXIST! ARE THERE TWO OR FIVE EYES IN YOUR HEAD?
            >there are no obama words zipping around your brain
            ANON CAN'T CODE IN C++ BECAUSE THERE ARE NO STRING VARIABLES ZIPPING AROUND IN HIS BRAIN!!!
            ANON CAN'T GET LAID BECAISE THERE ARE NO SOCIAL SKILLS ZIPPING AROUND IN HIS BRAIN!!!
            >It's a made up nomenclature of an abstract figure in a specific linguistic framework
            YOUR BRAIN DOESN' EXIST DUDE!!
            IT'S NOTHING MORE THAN A LINGUISTIC CONSTRUCT!!!
            YOU'R PENIS DOESN"T EXIST DUDE!!
            IT'S NOTHING MORE THAN A LINGUISTIC CONSTRUCT!!!

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            How do I purchase crack through dimensions so it's delivered in a nice little box somewhere close.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >How do I purchase crack through dimensions so it's delivered in a nice little box somewhere close.
            Crack is nothing more than a linguistic contract anon. It doesn't exist.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >hydrogen atom
            But you don't even believe hydrogen atoms exists anon. You think it's nothing more than a word.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >because reality isn't a quantitative system
            did you miss the part where everything is made up of waves that are expressed in quantized packets

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Quantization is a mathematical abstraction, reality doesn't have to quantify anything, it's a purely qualitative system that just runs its course, it assigns no names or numbers to anything

            the number 1 is a concrete representation of something that exists. You can take any one thing in real life and say that it corresponds to one. Numbers aren't made the frick up, they're representations that came from trying to rationalize and describe reality. There is no chicken and egg with math you fricking moron. Reality came first, then people, then numbers. Want to know how that works? Because one corresponds to one object, 2 corresponds to 2 objects, and the entire abstract framework of mathematics is derived and builds upon the fundamental observable principles of reality.

            Yours is such a stupid fricking argument because you think you can confuse everyone and look smart by handwaving language as if it's all made the frick up. It's not, and if it was, we wouldn't fricking exist. Even your thoughts are fricking real. Ever think of that? Your thoughts are actual physical things traveling along actual physical power lines connected to each other. Some of those actual physical things came together to understand that the number one is a real fricking thing. Even animals can understand this. You are dumber than a fricking horse. You are less than an animal.

            >the number 1 is a concrete representation of something that exists.
            representation of something =/= something
            Rick and Morty aren't actually running around inside your tv

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It literally does. When you have one proton that exists it is assigned a singular existence by the fact that it can't just fricking duplicate itself. Reality is inherently quantitative and no amount of self delusion on your part about the proper meaning of the semantics will change that. That's why math describes reality, because reality is quantitative. I would have loved to argue about this with you when I was dumb fricking teenager with something to prove, but you are so singularly quantitatively stupid I will concede that you are right anon, reality is qualitative and that is why when we want to understand how to get to the moon we talk amongst ourselves and apply the socratic method to open dialogue debates in the control room

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >When you have one proton
            A what of what? How do you know it's not two elephants? Oh wait, that's right, it's because you assigned arbitrary words to it to refer to something in a made-up linguistic framework, since the words themselves are made of nothing and have no meaning on their own!
            >it is assigned a singular existence by the fact that it can't just fricking duplicate itself
            But every proton is completely identical to every other proton, how do you know it's not one proton duplicating itself?
            >Reality is inherently quantitative
            representative with quantities =/= made of quantities
            >That's why math describes reality
            No, it doesn't, it predicts behaviour by approximating observations into an abstract numerical framework within which you can apply arithmetic transformations, it has no qualitative descriptive power nor does it describe the nature of the behaviours which it approximates, it's just an imitation model, like a painting, made to approximate information into more concise and easily conveyable models and metaphors

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            Don't forget your disrespect to the chickens and simulation

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            Like you want. Right. You earned these bodies. It's your problem. Nothing happens out of order in this world my friend.

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            If you knew the total of what you earned, and your specific 0% chance of escape, you'd be pissed off.

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            You're on a pleasure cruise right now which will come to an end. You're lost in the clouds living a fake life. That's what you have - that's nature - but when that's over I see no less than 1000 years with nuts as food, super pain and even worse bodies.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >A what of what? How do you know it's not two elephants? Oh wait, that's right, it's because you assigned arbitrary words to it to refer to something in a made-up linguistic framework, since the words themselves are made of nothing and have no meaning on their own!
            So according to you, everything you're saying is completely meaningless nonsense.
            Yet, you insist that your viewpoint is true.
            You're a self-contradicting moron lol.
            >No, it doesn't
            You don't get any say in the matter anon. According to you, everything you say is of zero meaning or bearing on reality because it's nothing more than a made-up linguistic framework of subjectivity. You're contradicting yourself by even having this debate with people. You clearly don't even believe in what you preach or you're too stupid to notice the contradiction.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I accept your concession, you can collect your anti-psychotics on the way out

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I accept your concession
            Lol, whenever somebody says that it is code for "I have no argument".
            >you can collect your anti-psychotics on the way out
            Said the autistic moron with no argument who unironically replies with "I accept your concession" and posts Weeb images.
            Also, according to you, nothing you have ever said has any meaning or value since it's purely imaginary. So according to you, you yourself live in a psych ward.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >whenever somebody says that it is code for "I have no argument".
            You didn't present an argument, just autistic screeching, you handed over the W with no resistance, ergo you conceded

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That isn't a valid argument anon.
            What you just said has no meaning because it's nothing more than a linguistic construct.
            According to you.
            Once again, you post autistic weeb pictures.
            Once again, you're upset.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >What you just said has no meaning because it's nothing more than a linguistic construct.
            And it has meaning within this linguistic framework, dumbass

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >And it has meaning within this linguistic framework, dumbass
            Nope, it has absolutely zero meaning according to you. It's nothing more than a made up linguistic construct of subjective nothingness.

            Brother, are you literally moronic? Have you really been this filtered by basic arithmetic that you are having map-territory problems with counting? Jesus Christ man.

            >Brother, are you literally moronic?
            Nope, but you certainly are.
            >Have you really been this filtered by basic arithmetic that you are having map-territory problems with counting? Jesus Christ man.
            That doesn't mean anything because it's a linguistic construct according to you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Nope, it has absolutely zero meaning according to you
            Zero meaning outside the framework wherein the abstracts are constructed, yes

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Zero meaning outside the framework wherein the abstracts are constructed, yes
            Nope, zero meaning full stop. According to you, everything you say is a meaningless hallucination of nothing of no use to anyone.
            You are nothing more than a crack head describing his hallucinations. According to you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The butthurt is strong in this one

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Not an argument anon.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I never argued, I stated all the facts while you continued your autistic screeching

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            They argue that number is outright the greatest infinity

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            Even if numbers are made up in some mystical way like the against argument suggests, the concept of a greater infinity is enough to count them.

            Thus, the against argument is just blowing hot hair and proving they have 10~IQ

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            you stated that the facts aren't knowable, moron. Which is the opposite of reality, and therefore false. If only you had written this down and figured it out quantitatively, you might have seen the issue

            I'm now a different anon btw, the one that originally made fun of you for being moronic. The fact you can't seem to understand the difference between mathematics as an objective framework and subjective linguistics suggests that you're, again, fricking moronic. And even if there were no logical contradictions in what you're saying, even if you were absolutely correct(you have to be a midwit or mentally ill to convince yourself of this, but I know you're probably autistic and cluster b and obviously not one of the smartest people here) you would STILL be moronic, because abstract subjective linguistic frameworks all refer to the same things and use basic syntactic structures that can be observed and correlated with other languages. You can STILL learn another language simply through exposure and relating real life objects to what other people are saying, because even the subjectivity inherent in language is underlied by concrete logical and mathematical structures that enable them to be useful in the first place, something you'd INTUITIVELY KNOW, IF YOU WEREN'T STUPID.

            But go on. Reality is qualitative. It's not quantitative. That's why even the gold standard for qualitative relationships is actually just a more complex quantitative framework. As if there's anything in this world that isn't just an outcropping of numbers and concrete, quantitative relationships. Handwave this again and prove your complete lack of understanding, and sub-par thinking. The best part is I know you're the one with something to prove, and yet, what you prove over and over again is that you are an irredeemable dumbass.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Redpill me on infity. How many numbers are there? Can we have more than that?

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            Ga'qle is the greatest amount.

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            There's such things as too great. Gi'qle is too great.

          • 1 month ago
            Barkon

            About 3.2 trillion.

            About 400,000 sets of 4000 quadrillion in system.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            TL;DR

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Who said anything about linguistics? There are obviously linguistic symbols that refer to counting numbers, but the counting numbers themselves are not the symbols. They are what the symbols refer to.

            It's the same problem with the idea that numbers are a materialist concept. It's obvious that the number "2" doesn't have some particular material thing that it is referring to. It's neither linguistic nor materialist.

            Numbers just are their own abstraction outside of these domains. It's the same way that rote logical truths don't have a dependency on what language they are written in for their truth value.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, nothing has any meaning. Too bad, you just have to live with it.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Imagine being filtered this hard by the difference between abstract thought and reality kwab

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nothing you just said has any meaning because it's just a linguistic construct.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And yet it was understood it because the arbitrary linguistic construct I used to write it is a useful tool for representing the fact that you're a homosexual. Much like numbers and reality, there's no intrinsic metric the universe uses to store this info, but luckily I can convey it in infinitely many ways through any made up language I choose.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Nothing you just said has any meaning because it's just a linguistic construct..

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          moronic af post

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >there is no largest natural number
      >natural numbers are infinite
      pick one.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Infinity is not one number, moron.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >countably infinite
          >count
          >not a number
          how do you count a non-number?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Because as anon just pointed out for you, infinity describes the lack of a largest number rather than a specific number itself.

          >countably infinite
          >count
          >not a number
          how do you count a non-number?

          You don't, you count without any end point, hence the set itself is ordered, countable and without end rather than just a mixed list of properties like an endless set of names for colors.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Your skull is shaped like a rock climbing hold, isn’t it?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          jesus frick that's funny

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Jealous?

  2. 1 month ago
    Barkon

    It's a question of a greater and lesser infinity, I've done my research, I know what's up. Pic rel.

    -BT

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, certain numbers you cannot speak. Certain numbers won't fit on your computer. Certain numbers are not possible to exist in the observable Universe. That's reality.

    And yet imagination can take shortcuts to any place, any time, any number because it is the greatest force in this Universe.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >And yet imagination can take shortcuts to any place, any time, any number because it is the greatest force in this Universe
      Wrong. Love is the greatest force in the Universe

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Perhaps, but I would say love itself is strongly based on the imagination.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          You can imagine loving someone but that's not the same as actually loving

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I didn't mean that. I meant more that the concept of love is imagination. Look at animals, they do all the things we do, they mate, care for each other and their kids (not always, yes) without that concept. We sort of made it more than it already was by the power of the imagination.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I meant more that the concept of love is imagination.
            I hope that someday you find that special someone who will change your mind on this.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Why would they? I've been in love. I don't think my way of looking at it diminishes it in any way, it is what it is.

  4. 1 month ago
    Barkon

    Mouf.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The natural numbers are absolutely not infinite. Perhaps you're thinking of the extended natural numbers. For every natural number n, n < n+1, therefore natural numbers are finite.

    • 1 month ago
      Barkon

      Kys now

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Perhaps you're thinking of the extended natural numbers
      So natural numbers you pseudointellectual moron lol.
      No, infinity doesn't actually exist.

  6. 1 month ago
    Barkon

    Don't give me all this shitty shit about how you're gonna betray the system, how you're filled with hate and against nature like everything's not fair and set in stone. You are driven by fear, you fear what you owe and have owed, and that's all you are - weak weak people. And that's honest - you will pay for your immorality in full one day. If I go-to your hell, I'll keep that in mind. Plus I won't be busy I'll likely batter you in fights all the time. Trust me, my revenge that spans centuries more will come to you in full.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >If we introduce a greater infinity, to count the natural numbers
    We don't need a greater infinity, we can just use the one we had before
    Just drop powerset bro

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Which directly creates greater infinities.
      Infinity doesn't exist. Set theory is useless stupid idiocy and you aren't intelligent.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Nah, we can have just one

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          nope.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            One (1) infinity

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Infinity doesn't exist anon.

            Why is all the bait here either about infinity, dark matter or /misc/ shit. At least come up with something new

            >Why is all the bait here either about infinity, dark matter or /misc/ shit. At least come up with something new
            There's plenty of other bullshit too for you to choose from anon.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            We can have one very small infinity

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            lol

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Youre the mean mom who shouts, "NO ICE CREAM! IF WE GET ONE, THEN EVERYONE HAS TO GET ONE, AND IT WILL NEVER STOP!"
            And Im the cool dad who says "We can just get one little one"
            Pic related its you

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why is all the bait here either about infinity, dark matter or /misc/ shit. At least come up with something new

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, that's what infinite means, regardless of the kind of infinity. What's your question?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yep, so infinity doesn't exist.

  10. 1 month ago
    Barkon

    Fools.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Any natural number can clearly be defind as a Dedekind Cut.

    • 1 month ago
      Barkon

      I'm not being cheap with you, homosexual. What do you want me to do? Make a long list? I'll keep some to myself.

    • 1 month ago
      Barkon

      I'm already making a school for you, a corporation for the best of the best which might include all of you but it's meant to be good at 50,000 limit members and I'm not sure if we're going to have to make multiple corps. It might be one corp but the test is harshunt. I will be completely open regarding tech, maybe... Who leads? Who do you tell and who don't you tell. Perhaps it's best if I know that and give you exactly what you need. It's not so simple on the outside. And on the topic of your businesses and worlds, you should finish my school before you start placing stuff in different dimensions, or even this one.

      • 1 month ago
        Barkon

        A corp is like the voice of all the best going on in a government controlled state. Think of this properly because I can't explain it here, it needs a lot of readjustment. We will have a corp to begin of 2500 strong members, including people out there.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *