Infinite = 1

[T0M]

Indeterminations of Infinite

 

 

∞ - ∞ = Indeterminable ?

∞ / ∞ = Indeterminable ?

∞ * 0 = Indeterminable ?

1 ^ ∞ = Indeterminable ?

 

 

 

 

Well, mathmaticians say (and teach) that Infinite minus Infinite is indeterminable (and a bunch of other indeterminations as the ones listed above).

I think (to be true: I know I know) that's crap. For two reasons:

 

Simple reason: Anything minus itself is cero. (as anything divided by itself is one, and anything multiplied by cero is cero, and one to the power of no matter what, will be one). I think that those who think otherwise, haven't really understood what minus means, nor multiply, nor divide... and of course not Infinite.

 

Simplier reason (harder to understand though): Infinite equals one, but not completely as one as a number, but as a whole. So, Infinite is a whole. So Infinite is the times that that whole can be splitted into.

I would say that Universal Maths don't need to go beyond 1. Ever.

By the way, of course there is -1. But that's 1 too.

 

So, as I know they teach that at the University, I would like to know how many people think as I do, and how many are wrong (just kidding)... and how many think wrong... God I just can't stop saying they're wrong! They are still wondering what cero divided by cero would be...

 

T0M

 

 

Disclaimer: I'm not a mathmatician, nor a scientist... and english is not my first language so I'm sorry for my mistakes if there's aney.

[clapstyx]

Hmm thats interesting.

 

if 22/7 equals pi, then 3 1/7 also equals pi which would make 1/7 the unresolved expansive component theoretically equalling infinity.

 

lets test it 1/7 =0.142 857 142 857 143 000 recurring

 

Hmm 0 recurring sounds like infinity to me..as far as you want to go.

 

Beginning with 0 and ending with a recurring 0..how odd. This sounds like a much better formula for infinity that 1.

 

Heres something else. If the probability of a given event occurring was placed on a scale with Impossible at one end and Certain at the other and "Saving the world was "Next to Impossible" how might its probability be increased and should it be attempted at all ?

 

Theoretically a given probability falls somewhere on a scale infinitely long and book ended by "Impossible" events and "Certainty". Would youn ot then say that once an event can be imagined (ie Saving the world could possibly occur under x circumstances..even though that might be highly unlikley).

 

Now lets say this : Saving the world could occur if someone created global harmony and then proved they were Jesus Christ..then being able to stand in as a global leader to co-ordinate the solution to rising Carbon Dioxide.

 

Now lets say that Global harmony could be created by inviting every musician in the world to play whatever instrument they had in their cupboard at 10.00 pm Australian Easter Standard Time on February the 14th. Would the chances of creating global harmony increase or decrease ? And would the chances of saving the world go up or down once we had realised that whoever we were and whatever religion we followed we all shared a common human goal and ideal that was now more ever present in our collective consciousness. Global Harmony would not only be proven literally but it would create greater possibilities into the future from that moment on.

 

Now lets say that saving the world could be achieved by telling everybody that paper was being consumed globally at a rate that was 40 times the rate of forest regrowth and that we ought really to be using a printing surface that could be cleaned and reused instead of being thrown away...if we really did wish to live in a world where CO2 was going up exponentially because the sequestration rate was out of balance with our rate of atmospheric pollution.

 

I dont know..for me I think we need to correctly conceptualise infinity so that we can grasp the concept of eternity and eternal life and then start acting in ways that increase the probability of that outcome occurring at every chance we get. History has shown there is a fine line between the probability of extinction and the probability of survival..with around 95% of all species having failed to pass the test. I think at the moment we are acting in ways that increase the chances of extinction much more than we are enhancing the chances of eternal existence. On this path we wont make the next millennia and when you consider many species have survived more than 100 million years I think that would class us as a failure..despite our potential.

[Bio-Hazard]

Infinite = n++ (goto) {beginning}

 

++ - ++ = ++ - + = +

[kamil]

(a+:D-c=a+(b-c)

inf-inf=0

inf+inf=inf

 

(inf+inf)-inf=inf-inf=0

inf+(inf-inf)=inf+0=inf

:eek2:

 

But here is my idea about wat infinity equals:

 

suppose each of these bars has 3 cm length -----------

 

if we know that the length of the whole bars is 33cm then we can bassically work out how many bars there are through the equaiton:

 

lenght of the whole bars/length of one bar=number of bars

33cm/3cm=11

 

We know that any line has an infinite amount of points, and we know that each point has length zero. Applying the above formula in this situation gives:

 

33cm/0=inf

 

:eek:

 

This concludes that infinity is inversely proportianol to 0, regardless of what the numerator is.:) :) just an idea

[CraigD]

…mathmaticians say (and teach) that Infinite minus Infinite is indeterminable (and a bunch of other indeterminations as the ones listed above).

I think (to be true: I know I know) that's crap. …

I believe you’re confused by the notation commonly used to represent infinity, ∞. By convention, this symbol usually refers to “the count (cardinality) of any set for which any member can be assigned (mapped to) a natural (1, 2, 3 …) number”. ∞ doesn’t refer to a specific number, but one of many numbers.

 

The statement

“∞ - ∞ is indeterminable”,

is similar to the statement

“Give A, B are members of the set of natural numbers, A – B is indeterminable”.

The statement

“∞ - ∞ = ∞”,

is similar to the statement

“A – B = C, where C is a member of the set of integers” (the cardinality of the set of integers is the same transfinite number as the cardinality of the set of natural numbers, named “Aleph-null” in the late 19th century by Cantor.

 

In Math, the study of infinite, also called transfinite, numbers, is interesting mostly in deciding if a particular infinite set can be mapped to another. It’s more about mapping algorithms than arithmetic.

Disclaimer: I'm not a mathmatician, nor a scientist... and english is not my first language so I'm sorry for my mistakes if there's aney.

I’m not a professional mathematician, but do have a degree in Math, and a few years experience teaching it. TOM, your written English seems excellent to me. Welcome to Hypography! :eek2:

[Erasmus00]

Consider that as x goes to infinity x^3 goes to infinity. So does x^2. However, x^3 grows much faster. Subtracting the two, in any case, doesn't yield 0.

-Will

[Turtle]

Hmm thats interesting.

 

if 22/7 equals pi, then 3 1/7 also equals pi which would make 1/7 the unresolved expansive component theoretically equalling infinity.

 

lets test it 1/7 =0.142 857 142 857 143 000 recurring

 

___Please have a look at the following Hypography thread wherin Craig elucidates the circumstance you propose.

http://hypography.com/forums/physics-mathematics/4639-repeating-digits-under-long-division.html

 

 

 

 

:eek2:

[T0M]

I believe you’re confused by the notation commonly used to represent infinity, ∞...

The statement

“∞ - ∞ is indeterminable”,

is similar to the statement

“Give A, B are members of the set of natural numbers, A – B is indeterminable”.

 

I appreciate your answer. It is exactly what I was looking for as a minimum to start discussing with.

 

In your example, A - B is indeterminable because A nor B are determined.

I determined Infinite to be a whole, a kind of one (but not one). Therefore Infinite - Infinite = 0 without any doubt for it's like 1 - 1 = 0. The only thing that can confuse one, once he has understood that, is, I think, if he thinks like about apples and pears. Then, he shall remember his first day at Maths, where we learn that apples can only be substracted from apples.

 

The problem with Infinite is the name we gave it. It's not easily understandable. We hear it so many times and still can't understand its meaning. I would call it something more like "whole", and I would even make 2 concepts out of Infinite and call them differently, and that would be something like Whole, and Loop.

Infinite doesn't mean "constantly growing and unreachable end". We can understand the whole, and it simply loops. In all directions (to make a graphic analogy). Infinite is 1, where there's no 2.

 

T0M

[C1ay]

There are many kinds and sizes of infinity. Without specifying exactly which infinities you are referring to, the equation infinity-infinity is meaningless, it is indeterminable.

[T0M]

There are many kinds and sizes of infinity. Without specifying exactly which infinities you are referring to, the equation infinity-infinity is meaningless, it is indeterminable.

Again, remember apples minus apples.

 

T0M

[C1ay]

Again, remember apples minus apples.

 

T0M

So how much is (y)apples-(x)apples where y and x are both infinity but one is bigger than the other? Say that y is the infinite set of points between 0 and 2 on the number line and x is the infinite set of points between 0 and 1 on the number line.

[pgrmdave]

How about (infinity) - (infinity -1) ? Does that need to equal 1?

I will agree that 0 * infinity = 0, and 1^infinity = 1, because the limit of 0*x or 1^x as x approaches infinity is 0 and 1, respectively. However, because we cannot tell infinity apart from 2 * infinity, or infinity + 928,304,983, or infinity plus any other constant, or multiplied by any constant, we can't quite map it onto a variable so easily. It comes down to a question of whether or not infinity = infinity, I think.

[rockytriton]

how can you subtract two things that aren't numbers?? I just don't understand this question.

[T0M]

So how much is (y)apples-(x)apples where y and x are both infinity but one is bigger than the other? Say that y is the infinite set of points between 0 and 2 on the number line and x is the infinite set of points between 0 and 1 on the number line.

You keep trying to give a number to Infinite.

Forget about giving a value to it. The number of points between 0 and 1, and 0 and 2 are the same: Infinite. There are not two different Infinites, not even an infinite number of Infinites. Infinite is not a value, not a number.

It's a Whole, and it Loops.

 

How about (infinity) - (infinity -1) ? Does that need to equal 1?

Infinity is not a number, but yes of course: whatever that 1 you have put there be, will be the result of your equation.

 

I will agree that 0 * infinity = 0, and 1^infinity = 1, because the limit of 0*x or 1^x as x approaches infinity is 0 and 1, respectively. However, because we cannot tell infinity apart from 2 * infinity, or infinity + 928,304,983, or infinity plus any other constant, or multiplied by any constant, we can't quite map it onto a variable so easily. It comes down to a question of whether or not infinity = infinity, I think.

Still thinking about different Infinites. Infinite = Infinite, of course! If you went that far, well have fun but come back, you can't doubt an equation like that!

As for your other equations, there's no point on adding to Infinite, or multiplying it.

 

how can you subtract two things that aren't numbers?? I just don't understand this question.

Numbers aren't just numbers. Numbers are to represent things. Things that aren't numbers. So we calculate variations of these "things" represented by numbers. Numbers are still the only way our brains have to understand these variations, and comunicate them too.

Given a house, if you substract the same house to it, you will have nothing.

That is:

1 - 1 = 0.

House - House = 0.

Infinite - Infinite = 0.

 

T0M

[C1ay]

You keep trying to give a number to Infinite.

Forget about giving a value to it. The number of points between 0 and 1, and 0 and 2 are the same: Infinite. There are not two different Infinites, not even an infinite number of Infinites. Infinite is not a value, not a number.

It's a Whole, and it Loops.

Well, post your proof then. I've been taught that all infinities are not the same but you are claiming that they are. I'd like to see the evidence.

[T0M]

Well, post your proof then. I've been taught that all infinities are not the same but you are claiming that they are. I'd like to see the evidence.

You think you will ever "see" the evidence? I think our (human) brains are already "strong" enough to know that there are concepts we can "know" without "seeing" any evidence, for those concepts will never be interpreted by any of our senses, but only our minds themselves, out of almost nothing.

So there are no evidences outside your mind. I can't show my evidences to you, I can't even show yours to you.

Believe to be powerfull enough to understand it, and one day you will.

 

T0M

[C1ay]

I think our (human) brains are already "strong" enough to know that there are concepts we can "know" without "seeing" any evidence...

That's not science. Science does not accept such things as fact without proof and your claim does not add up. If all infinities are equal then why does math differentiate between a countably infinite set and an uncountably infinite set? Would you claim the set of real numbers is the same size as the set of integers? Can you prove it?

 

BTW, you might want to take a look at the rules here. Number 4 in particular states, "Statements like "I just know that this is the way it is" are considered ignorant and might be deleted." Can you prove your claim or are you just proffering a theory?