RIP Araysar

Negative numbers are a human fabrication, and don't exist in reality.

Furry said:

Negative numbers are a human fabrication, and don't exist in reality.

Click to expand...

Explain charge of the electron.

wormie said:

Explain charge of the electron.

Click to expand...

It's the human rationalization of the positive attraction between particles. For mathematical sake, we describe one half as negative and one half as positive, though in reality, this positive attraction is measurable, thus non negative.

Furry said:

It's the human rationalization of the positive attraction between particles. For mathematical sake, we describe one half as negative and one half as positive, though in reality, this positive attraction is measurable, thus non negative.

Click to expand...

The attraction between two electrically charged particles does not have to be positive. But that's besides the point, the negative is necessary to describe a physical phenomena is it not?

All numbers are a human fabrication, positive and negative and zero; there are no numbers in nature. I assume you are talking about negative numbers specifically as an allusion to your previous claims that using negative numbers in physics is meaningless.

wormie said:

The attraction between two electrically charged particles does not have to be positive. But that's besides the point, the negative is necessary to describe a physical phenomena is it not?

Click to expand...

No, The attraction could be described as positive, that is why it is rational. And you are correct that all numbers are human fabrications. The positive ones can be shown to exist. One shekel is a price sly definable amount, and it can be put in front of a person to be seen. A negative shekel does not exist, cannot be shown to anyone, but a bank may claim it, in order to eventually receive your positive shekel.

Furry said:

No, The attraction could be described as positive, that is why it is rational. And you are correct that all numbers are human fabrications. The positive ones can be shown to exist. One shekel is a price sly definable amount, and it can be put in front of a person to be seen. A negative shekel does not exist, cannot be shown to anyone, but a bank may claim it, in order to eventually receive your positive shekel.

Click to expand...

Not all attractions are positive. And your description of numbers is actually examples of numerals, not numbers. You cannot show a number as no numbers exist in the physical world. Your obsession with just negative numbers not existing is strange.

wormie said:

Not all attractions are positive. And your description of numbers is actually examples of numerals, not numbers. You cannot show a number as no numbers exist in the physical world. Your obsession with just negative numbers not existing is strange.

Click to expand...

Being measurable strictly excludes something from being a negative phenomenon. Your inability to grasp that measurability defines positive existence is pretty low IQ. Negative numbers exist and are reasonable only as a reference to things when they are measurable. Negative numbers that are immeasurable are total nonsense, and using them to justify anything mathematically is simply wrong and super low IQ.

Furry said:

Being measurable strictly excludes something from being a negative phenomenon. Your inability to grasp that measurability defines positive existence is pretty low IQ. Negative numbers exist and are reasonable only as a reference to things when they are measurable. Negative numbers that are immeasurable are total nonsense, and using them to justify anything mathematically is simply wrong and super low IQ.

Click to expand...

Negative numbers are used to justify many things in all sciencea so all of sciences is super low IQ?

Take negative and positive charges. Sure the + and - are arbitrarily assigned and what we call a negative charge can be called positive and all the physical laws will stay the same. But the existence of some measured quantity that we assign a positive to, requires there be a quantity that we assign a negative to. To say this is low IQ is pretty low IQ.

You can take issue with whether or not numbers are real but making an issue about only the negative numbers seems ignorant.

wormie said:

Negative numbers are used to justify many things in all sciencea so all of sciences is super low IQ?

Click to expand...

No, Science that uses negative numbers to justify their fields is super low IQ. If you have been paying attention lately, you'd also notice that a majority of scientists are super low IQ in general, though.

Generally, I'd say esoteric field theories are basically the gender studies of mathematical theory. They essentially trap autistic people into dick cutting themselves and never achieving anything useful. Euler's identity is one of the most disgusting non-proofs in existence, which is further reinforced by the fact that it's generally true in reality. One could write a large book about the problems with "i" and why any conclusion reached in the negative realm of mathematics in nonsense if it can't be reached in the positive realm as well.

Try to keep up low IQ.

wormie said:

Why are you making assumptions about my impulse control? Are you really in a position to know anything about it?

Click to expand...

I don't have to make assumptions. Anytime the tribe gets mentioned its like someone fired up the Hebrew Batsignal around here. You can't even stop yourself in the Rickshaw.

I can only imagine that wormie is googling what euler’s theory is and the accepted proofs to try and refute me now.

Phazael said:

I don't have to make assumptions. Anytime the tribe gets mentioned its like someone fired up the Hebrew Batsignal around here. You can't even stop yourself in the Rickshaw.

Click to expand...

What a disgusting liar you are. I reply to what I choose to reply to, i do not reply to all your low IQ tribe mentions.

Furry said:

I can only imagine that wormie is googling what euler’s theory is and the accepted proofs to try and refute me now.

Click to expand...

I have no need to, unlike you, my education didnt end in high school.

Furry said:

No, Science that uses negative numbers to justify their fields is super low IQ. If you have been paying attention lately, you'd also notice that a majority of scientists are super low IQ in general, though.

Generally, I'd say esoteric field theories are basically the gender studies of mathematical theory. They essentially trap autistic people into dick cutting themselves and never achieving anything useful. Euler's identity is one of the most disgusting non-proofs in existence, which is further reinforced by the fact that it's generally true in reality. One could write a large book about the problems with "i" and why any conclusion reached in the negative realm of mathematics in nonsense if it can't be reached in the positive realm as well.

Try to keep up low IQ.

Click to expand...

You are saying that all of physics and engineering and chemistry is invalid. I dont get how you can be so stupid but yet here we are.

BoozeCube said:

So shit different day.

Click to expand...

Still projecting.

wormie said:

I have no need to, unlike you, my education didnt end in high school.


You are saying that all of physics and engineering and chemistry is invalid. I dont get how you can be so stupid but yet here we are.

Click to expand...

Lmao the assumptions. When did i ever say any of that? Additionally I took high level calculus in college, and have won numerous math competitions. Can you project any harder. Euler’s theory is true in the real world, but the math is ugly as fuck, and you can use the same accepted math in the proof to show 0 = 1, some versions include multiplication by 0 for gods sakes.

Furry said:

Lmao the assumptions. When did i ever say any of that? Additionally I took high level calculus in college, and have won numerous math competitions. Can you project any harder. Euler’s theory is true in the real world, but the math is ugly as fuck, and you can use the same accepted math in the proof to show 0 = 1, some versions include multiplication by 0 for gods sakes.

Click to expand...

You said complex numbers are fake. Physics, engineering and chemistry (which is just physics) relies on complex numbers. Without complex numbers these fields do not exist. There was no assumptions made, just a repeating of what you yourself stated. Calculus is a freshman topic in most colleges and is actually a high school topic in even semi decent colleges. There is no such thing as high level calculus. If you mean analysis, I am 100% certain you are lying. Math competitions do not teach actual math so that claim is not relevant. And eulers identity, which is what I assume you mean when you say euler's theory in this context, has fairly basic proofs that, frankly, dont even count as proofs once you get past the most basic of mathematics. You have no idea what it is you are talking about.

wormie said:

You said complex numbers are fake. Physics, engineering and chemistry (which is just physics) relies on complex numbers. Without complex numbers these fields do not exist. There was no assumptions made, just a repeating of what you yourself stated. Calculus is a freshman topic in most colleges and is actually a high school topic in even semi decent colleges. There is no such thing as high level calculus. If you mean analysis, I am 100% certain you are lying. Math competitions do not teach actual math so that claim is not relevant. And eulers identity, which is what I assume you mean when you say euler's theory in this context, has fairly basic proofs that, frankly, dont even count as proofs once you get past the most basic of mathematics. You have no idea what it is you are talking about.

Click to expand...

Obviously in higher level calculus I meant bigger numbers than just calc 1, 2, 3, as my college did it, so you are just being a weasel with that. As for math competitions of course they don’t teach math, they demonstrate your ability to do it, generally there are mental math categories, calculator categories, and ones where you are allowed paper to work on problems. Are you really this dumb? And why do you think I reject complex numbers. I’ve never said anything like that. My claim is and always has been that conclusions reached with a negative result are nonsense if you can’t frame them in such a way that you reach them with a positive result, and that assuming a negative result has meaning if you reach a positive result is also nonsense. That has absolutely nothing to do with anything you just said.

And for Euler’s proof i mean specifically the Taylor expansion proof he made, though any subset there of is equally stupid.

The big problem is that “i” kinda works, but any mathematician ignorant of the inherent problem it represents in the difference between math and reality, and just accepts it blindly is a moron.