h a l f b a k e r yExpensive, difficult, slightly dangerous, not particularly effective... I'm on a roll.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
... unless Banach and Tarski are playing, in which case the new balls are all full-sized. |
|
| |
And THAT... is why I come to the HB. I learn stuff. Thank you pert! |
|
| |
Why is this important? Because I read "Banach and Tarski" and said "What? Are those porn stars with big balls or something?" <--(that's not a joke) |
|
| |
The amount of stuff I have to learn is staggering, but I'm very motivated. |
|
| |
Information is a weird thing to get addicted to. It only leads to cravings for more because every time you get a hit of this information drug, you realize how little you have and how much is out there to trip on. |
|
| |
Just when I'm about to think I'm smart again, I realize I don't know shit. And frankly I get a bit jealous of those who already "know" everything their is to know. What's it like for them to be able to relax and become complacent thinking there's nothing else to learn in this infinitely complicated universe? I bet it's relaxing, like being in a hot tub of unawareness-unawareness. |
|
| |
So thank you pert, today I became just a little less ignorant. I'm still a glorified monkey that can make things light up, send messages and fly, but my reaction to many things is still "Ooo ooo!" as in the link though I don't come right out and say it that way. |
|
| |
//Information is a weird thing to get addicted to.// |
|
| |
Who knew?
Time machine.
Guidance counsellors. |
|
| |
//those who already "know" everything their is to know// |
|
| |
The last of those died in 1893. See link. And you're welcome. :-) |
|
| |
Also, to be clear, I don't actually *understand* the Banach-Tarski paradox. At all. I just enjoyed breaking my head trying to. I'm glad you had a similar experience. Ooo-ooo back at you. |
|
| |
I have a BT parodox theory theory, they're equating infinity with little balls in a graphic implying a given size. Balls of a given size are going to have specific measurable points. When you throw "infinity" into everything that's a non measurable specific so when you start applying geometric rules to them, they don't follow them, because infinity isn't a real thing in terms of being a measurable metric, so you can say anything you want to make it sound mystical. |
|
| |
Instead of infinite, let's use the metric of monkey hoots. Monkey hoots are non measurable, they have nothing to do with monkeys, I just chose the name and they're useless for measuring anything. Then I start measuring things in terms of "monkey hoots". Oh my god! I can come up with all sorts of bottom lines that don't match inches or millimeters! |
|
| |
That's because monkey hoots are about as useful a measurement metric as ghost farts. |
|
| |
I'll go back and look at it again, but I got angry at how long the guy was taking to make his point and got bored. I know when Einstein spoke I understood what he said, and that was some pretty smarty pants stuff. When somebody's taking fifteen minutes to throw out a theory when the theory of relativity takes about 2 minutes I get suspicious that they're just fucking with people. |
|
| |
But I'll go back and look. If there's something being called a "paradox" I tend to think should be called "pair-o-crocks". Maybe it's the secret of the universe or something. Not holding my breath though. |
|
| |
But again, massive hoots to you for posting it, that stuff is very interesting to know about. If the science involved is psychology rather than physics, that's interesting in itself eh? |
|
| |
Okay, looked at it again. |
|
| |
No. If your math equation says you can create matter out of thin air by moving some things around your math is wrong. Yea, if you have infinite points in a pea and you expand it to the size of the sun you've got the same number of points just like if you're measuring in ghost farts. |
|
| |
You can't make two physical balls out one with there being the same amount of matter in each as is implied. This is semantics, not math. If a mathamagician is talking bout "infinity points" having some application with regard to the physical properties of matter, it's because they have an awful haircut and can't get laid because chicks think they look like a dork. |
|
| |
This is a puzzle prank, nothing more. But again, it's still very interesting and it's stuff like this that brings me to the HB. |
|
| |
I think the idea of these puzzle pranks is that they should illustrate something useful. |
|
| |
E.g Hilbert's hotel, with an infinite number of rooms, and an infinite number of hippies arrive and so they each get a room, and the hotel is full. Then an infinite number of punks turn up and demand rooms, so the manager says to the hippies, we will give you each a discount if you agree to move to another room. Just go the the room that is double your old room number. Now the hippies are all in even numbered rooms and the odd numbered rooms are vacant for the punks. Tells us something interesting about the number line and infinities. |
|
| |
Not sure what big pairs of balls tells us. Hopefully someone cleverer than me can explain. |
|
| |