Behold The Power Of Wau

[phillip1882]

what is the number wau?

it is nothing, and everything.

it is yes and no.

it is an unflipped coin.

it is a flipped coin inside a riddle inside a conundrum.

wau is the value such that:

wau! = 1

it is the value such that:

(((wau!)!)!)!..... = 1

or the value:

wau^n = wau^(1/n)

or even:

wau^wau^wau^wau^wau... = wau

wau can be written as a continued fraction in the following way:

wau = wau +wau/(wau +wau/(wau +wau/(wau ...

wau is a square such that the ratio of the area to the length of a side = wau.

wau is a cube such that the volume = area of face = side length = wau.

the best way to express wau is in binary:

take the number 1, invert and append. 10. invert and append. 1001. keep on doing so indefinitely. 10010110011010010110100110010110...

wau is any given bit.

[joekgamer]

wau is the value such that:

wau! = 1

it is the value such that:

(((wau!)!)!)!..... = 1

or the value:

wau^n = wau^(1/n)

or even:

wau^wau^wau^wau^wau... = wau

wau can be written as a continued fraction in the following way:

wau = wau +wau/(wau +wau/(wau +wau/(wau ...

wau is a square such that the ratio of the area to the length of a side = wau.

wau is a cube such that the volume = area of face = side length = wau.

 

So this "wau" number is just one? That would be the only value (at least, that I can think of) that would be able to do these things, seeing as 1!=1, 1^n=1 for any value of n, including 1/n, and so on. A one by any other name is still one, after all.

[phillip1882]

wau is 0 or 1.

0! = 1

0^n = 0

0^(1/n) = 0

0 +0/(0 +0/(0 +... can be said to equal 0.

Edited March 21, 2012 by phillip1882

[joekgamer]

wau is 0 or 1.

 

So, according to this statement, "wau" does not have a definite value? In what context would it be useful?

 

0! = 1

0^n = 0

0^(1/n) = 0

0 +0/(0 +0/(0 +... can be said to equal 0.

 

Isn't 0/0 defined to equal 1, technically?

 

Also, how does this relate to your number "wau"?

[bravox]

So, according to this statement, "wau" does not have a definite value? In what context would it be useful?

(Jumping in...)

 

I think this is the concept of a qubit used in quantum computing. A qubit is both 0 and 1 at the same time, but it cannot be computed using classical rules.

 

Isn't 0/0 defined to equal 1, technically?

Actually, 0/0 is undefined, it can't have a value. If you assign it any value, including infinity, you run into paradoxes.

[joekgamer]

Actually, 0/0 is undefined, it can't have a value. If you assign it any value, including infinity, you run into paradoxes.

 

I had been under the impression that is was "poorly defined", not undefined. Since a/a=1, then 0/0=1, right? Seeing as this is not dividing, then where do the paradoxes come from?

 

I think this is the concept of a qubit used in quantum computing. A qubit is both 0 and 1 at the same time, but it cannot be computed using classical rules.

 

Could you elaborate on this? I don't quite understand what you mean here.

[Qfwfq]

wau is 0 or 1.

0! = 1

0^n = 0

0^(1/n) = 0

0 +0/(0 +0/(0 +... can be said to equal 0.

Nah, it doesn't work for the continued fraction, which is meaningless in the case of 0 and doesn't match up at all in the case of 1.

[bravox]

I had been under the impression that is was "poorly defined", not undefined.

No, it is explicitly undefined, in the sense that you are prohibited from giving it a value.

 

Since a/a=1, then 0/0=1, right? Seeing as this is not dividing, then where do the paradoxes come from?

if 0/0 = 1

then 2*0/0 = 2

but 2*0 = 0

therefore 0/0 = 2

leading to 1 = 2

 

Could you elaborate on this? I don't quite understand what you mean here.

I'm not an expert. As far as I understand it, the idea is to use quantum superposition to process multiple combinations of bits at the same time, making data processing a lot faster than can be done with traditional computers.

 

Think about it this way: for a computer to evaluate the results of all possible combination of two bits (00, 01, 10, 11) it needs four cycles. A quantum computer using two qubits only needs one cycle (every qubits represents both values). The difference grows exponentially with the number of qubits.

 

That's a bit too simplistic. For more details, ask Google :)

[phillip1882]

so, according to this statement, "wau" does not have a definite value? In what context would it be useful?

well, i just listed some uses. it solves some equations that no other value can.

but if you want a more specific use, wau could be used to represent a unknown binary bit.

 

for example, let 0 = false and 1 = True. False and wau = False.

even though we don't know the value wau, we can evaluate this expression.

or as bravox mentioned, it could be used as the "bit" of quantum computing.

[joekgamer]

Nah, it doesn't work for the continued fraction, which is meaningless in the case of 0 and doesn't match up at all in the case of 1.

 

Ah, right. 1+1=2, not 1. :doh:

I can't believe I missed that.

 

 

I had been under the impression that is was "poorly defined", not undefined.

No, it is explicitly undefined, in the sense that you are prohibited from giving it a value.

 

Since a/a=1, then 0/0=1, right? Seeing as this is not dividing, then where do the paradoxes come from?

if 0/0 = 1

then 2*0/0 = 2

but 2*0 = 0

therefore 0/0 = 2

leading to 1 = 2

 

I see what you mean with the paradoxes, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Could you elaborate on this? I don't quite understand what you mean here.

I'm not an expert. As far as I understand it, the idea is to use quantum superposition to process multiple combinations of bits at the same time, making data processing a lot faster than can be done with traditional computers.

 

Think about it this way: for a computer to evaluate the results of all possible combination of two bits (00, 01, 10, 11) it needs four cycles. A quantum computer using two qubits only needs one cycle (every qubits represents both values). The difference grows exponentially with the number of qubits.

 

That's a bit too simplistic. For more details, ask Google :)

 

Sorry, I should have been more specific. I had meant that I did not understand the reasoning behind saying that "wau" "is the concept of a qubit", as qubits are a rather significantly more detailed concept than is shown here, and that still does not answer the question of why one would want to call it "wau", as opposed to using the preexisting notation.

[Turtle]

i haven't quite grokked Wau, but i found this explanation intriguing.

 

[Qfwfq]

Ah, right. 1+1=2, not 1. :doh:

I can't believe I missed that.

Well, it's exactly what I reckoned Phillip's blunder must have been.

 

Turtle's girlfriend is a really cute troll, never seen such a cute one before. ;)

 

She gives a mighty strong hint at about 2:40 and there's a spot later where she prolly meant to say wau but she instead says a more familiar name.

[Turtle]

 

Turtle's girlfriend is a really cute troll, never seen such a cute one before. ;)

 

She gives a mighty strong hint at about 2:40 and there's a spot later where she prolly meant to say wau but she instead says a more familiar name.

 

wow! what was i thinking? i feel so dirty nau. i will require more than one shower to restore my natural unity. :lol:

[phillip1882]

[Qfwfq]

But that one is flawed too Pillip.