Reply
Wed 26 May, 2004 12:32 pm
Part of my research paper explores concepts of infinity. I would like to knwo if anyone has any ideas or sources for the subject. To be a bit more specific, I partly want to show the unpredictability of infinity (meaning it is often misunderstood), but also anything that YOU find interesting on the subject, any concepts whatsoever, feel free to share. I'm still at a brainstorming stage.
Secondly, I will attempt to disprove parallel lines. Based on the fact that the distance between parallel lines in finite, therefor in relation to infinity that distance is negligible. I believe the subject is not merely a matter of semantics, and I would be interested in any of your ideas for or against the concept.
Thank you. I hope this sparks at least some sort of discussion.
Re: Help on Research Paper
SCoates wrote:Secondly, I will attempt to disprove parallel lines. Based on the fact that the distance between parallel lines in finite, therefor in relation to infinity that distance is negligible. I believe the subject is not merely a matter of semantics, and I would be interested in any of your ideas for or against the concept.
I'm afraid you lost me on this one. What difference does it make if the distance between the lines is finite and what does it matter if that distance is minute when compared to infinity? As long as the distance between two lines remains constant at all points along the two lines they are parallel.
Negligible might not have been the best word. In relation to infinity any finite distance btween the lines will act as zero, and the lines will overlap.
OK, that's a better description but I don't see how you are going to make your case. The distance may be small in comparision but to disprove parallel lines you'd have to prove they are in fact zero, not that they "will act as zero".
(The concept of parallel lines refers to comparison of the two lines themselves so the infinity factor is really irrelevant, IMO.)
This goes back to the previous thread on binary thinking. In this case to disprove parallel lines you have to prove that the distance between the lines becomes "0" at some point. But as long as there is any distance, no matter how minute, you will fail.
.00000000000000000(ad infinitum)000001 is always greater then 0.
Are you going to pay any attention to the several thousand years of mathematical knowledge which has actually been developed on this subject, or just sort of bypass that and make up your own?
Fishin', .0000001 with infinite zeros does in fact equal 0.
Brandon, yes, to the first part of your poorly worded question. Your response seems very impertinent, unless I am misinterpreting, in which case I give you the chance of explaining yourself.
SCoates wrote:Fishin', .0000001 with infinite zeros does in fact equal 0.
lol Ok. And 12 is really 94. Either something is or it isn't. A number doesn't become another number. As long as that "1" is in there it is NEVER equeal to zero. No matter how many decimal places you take it out it will always be more than the number zero taken out to the same number of decimal places.
1/3 is .33333333...
2/3 is .66666666...
3/3 is .99999999...
I'm no calculus expert, and if anyone can explain why I'm wrong I'd love to hear it. In the meantime, I would appreciate thoughts, rather than questions.
So far it seems everyone assumes I'm making a wild guess. I have done research and I see nothing relavent which conflicts with my view. I realize that does not mean I am correct, which is why I asked if anyone can support the opposite of my argument, rather than question my conclusion. If you feel you can question my conclusion in a more productive manner that is also welcome.
well, I'm not anything close to being a mathematician, so I thought your statement seem interesting enough - and you said it with lots of authority. I was asking very seriously because It seemed to me that you knew something, along the lines of this research, that explained exactly why a decimalled number with a infinite zeros and 1 following by more zeros was equal to zero, rather than to som hellaciously decimalled form of a number betwen 0 and 1.
Now, I'm sorry if you thought I was assuming you were wildly guessing, but I wasn't. Now, I'll just politely sit quietly and read the rest of this thread as it develops, and maybe somewhere herein, that question I asked earlier and just now will be answered.
<smile>
Fishin', you seem to think infinity is just a really big number. That brings your logic to an erroneous conclusion.
Sorry, onyxelle, and fishin' too. I was mad about something else, and it obviously rubbed off onto this thread. I have been disrespectful, and I apologize.
Quote:Secondly, I will attempt to disprove parallel lines.
I have an article on that very subject around here somewhere. Lines, in fact, do not remain parallel forever because of the warp factor and other variables that tie in down the road.
Not the best explanation, but I'm happy with it.
I'll dig up the article and hook you up, Scoates.
SCoates,
Your claim about 0.00000....00001 is false.
And it has nothing to do with thinking "infinity is just a really big number".
Onyxelle, it is because infinity is not just a really big number. It is always one step beyond. So if you imagine something that is infinitely small, it would be non-existent. If it were in fact measurable in any degree, then it could be smaller, and therefor is not infinitely small.
SCoates, the problem then is that the ending "1" can't rest at the end of infinity as there is none.
Craven, I disagree. If it were any bit larger than zero, then it could be smaller. However, I assume you have proof to back up your statement.
I posted before I saw your explanation. I think trying to confine or express infinity in numbers is in fact part of the problem, which is why I expressed it in different terms.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace