Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,623
24,834
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Wait, so negative numbers aren't a real to you because there is no physical manifestation of them? Your logic is retarded as any number positive or negative is a human prescription to a particular object at a particular frame of reference.

You may have 2 bananas, but I say you have 0.x mMol of K+, C, etc...
Click to expand...
You're beginning to understand. Basically, when both sides of any physical property cannot be bound, then negative numbers are fine as results. When a side of a physical property can be bound, then negative numbers are irrational. So negative distances are not irrational, you can just frame it in the context of going backwards. Negative masses however are irational, because you can't shift the starting reference for mass, only the scale by which you measure it.

Another important thing to understand about negative numbers is when they represent a loss of information. i is essentially a mechanism to attempt to maintain information due to the fact that our number system is inherently one dimensional, but math is often calculated in a two dimension manner (most multiplication, division and above is two dimensional math in terms of equations). i is an attempt to preserve that information in the form of basically being a crude form of a second axis. The easiest way to explain it is that i is basically the up on a graph and -i the down on a graph. Anyone dealing with complex equations should be aware of when they are mathematically destroying information, such as in the simple equation -2 x -2 = 4, and strive to maintain that information or frame their mathematics in a way where the possibility of destroying information isn't required.

edit: and to be fair, for the VAST majority of situations, this is entirely unnecessary. Math generally works.
 
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
-2 * - 2 = 4 is not destroying anything. It is true due to the properties of a set of object that we call integers.

By these properties, (-2) * (-2) = (-1) * (2) * (-1) * (2) = (-1) * (-1) * (2) * (2).
To define what the fuck (-1) * (-1) is we start with the additive inverses properties of integers, 1 + (-1) = 0. Then,
0 = (1 + (-1)) * (1 + (-1)) = 1 +1 * (-1) + 1 * (-1) + ((-1) * (-1)) = 1 + (-1) + (-1) + ((-1) * (-1)) = (-1) + ((-1) * (-1)), hence (-1) * (-1) = -(-1)=1.
Therefore we have (-1) * (-1) * (2) * (2) = (1) * (2) * (2) = 2 * 2 = 4.

Nothing is destroyed, these are the rules of the integers. I dont know shit about physics but please stop butchering my mathematics.
 
pharmakos

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,306
-2,236
if there is any information being destroyed there, that information is still merely a human construct and so inconsequential in regards to reality.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Furry_sl said:
Anyone dealing with complex equations should be aware of when they are mathematically destroying information, such as in the simple equation -2 x -2 = 4, and strive to maintain that information or frame their mathematics in a way where the possibility of destroying information isn't required.

edit: and to be fair, for the VAST majority of situations, this is entirely unnecessary. Math generally works.
Click to expand...
This is gibberish. Mathematics doesn't work this way. Information theory doesn't work this way.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,623
24,834
wormie_sl said:
-2 * - 2 = 4 is not destroying anything. It is true due to the properties of a set of object that we call integers.

By these properties, (-2) * (-2) = (-1) * (2) * (-1) * (2) = (-1) * (-1) * (2) * (2).
To define what the fuck (-1) * (-1) is we start with the additive inverses properties of integers, 1 + (-1) = 0. Then,
0 = (1 + (-1)) * (1 + (-1)) = 1 +1 * (-1) + 1 * (-1) + ((-1) * (-1)) = 1 + (-1) + (-1) + ((-1) * (-1)) = (-1) + ((-1) * (-1)), hence (-1) * (-1) = -(-1)=1.
Therefore we have (-1) * (-1) * (2) * (2) = (1) * (2) * (2) = 2 * 2 = 4.

Nothing is destroyed, these are the rules of the integers. I dont know shit about physics but please stop butchering my mathematics.
Click to expand...
Grats, its a proof. That's independent of the point of my example. I never said the math was wrong. It is indeed very right.
 
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
Furry_sl said:
Grats, its a proof. That's independent of the point of my example. I never said the math was wrong. It is indeed very right.
Click to expand...
You said information is destroyed. I showed why thats a pants on head retarded statement and showed why information is not destroyed.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,623
24,834
to be fair, i should specifically said squaring a number destroys information. Because what is the root of 4. ect ect
 
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
Nothing is destroyed. If we have a function f: A -> B where f(x) = x^2, then pre image of f = {2, -2}. As you can see, both numbers are still there. Fucking magical isnt it.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,623
24,834
wormie_sl said:
Nothing is destroyed. If we have a function f: A -> B where f(x) = x^2, then pre image of f = {2, -2}. As you can see, both numbers are still there. Fucking magical isnt it.
Click to expand...
Correct, the information destroyed is which number it came from.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,623
24,834
wormie_sl said:
Is there a number other than 4 that equals 2^2 or (-2)^2 ?
Click to expand...
Information destroyed has to do with undoing the equation, not figuring out the possibilities. -2 and 2 squared both have one distinct answer. The root of 4 has two different distinct and correct answers. In the real world, there is typically only one solution to the equation what is the root of 4, and you sometimes have to solve to figure out which possiibility is irrational. This is a basic math concept, not sure what you're having a problem understanding.
 
wormie

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
I am having problem understanding why you keep claiming something gets destroyed. It is not a mathematical concept that x^2 = 4 only has 1 answer. Unless you define your domain to be x >=0. If thats the case, then what are you losing?
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Dude, if all you have been talking about is that you have to look at the solutions to equations and see if they actually apply when solving real problems, then no shit. This is covered in fucking basic algebra courses. You don't have any great insight, so stop acting like you are plugged into some secret truth with your brosef Einstein.

However, calling it "information being destroyed" is gibberish, pure fucking gibberish.
 
R

Rhuma_sl

shitlord
762
0
One thing that can help is to realize that mathematics is a world of
its own that can be used to MODEL things in the real world, but, like
any model, is not IDENTICAL to that real world. Negative numbers are
part of the "model world", not the real world. So there are some
situations where negative numbers make sense (and a negative answer
to a problem is valid), and others where they do not (so that a
negative answer just means there is no solution to the original
problem). In the case of temperatures, the 0 point (except in
absolute temperature) is arbitrary, so that SOME negative values are
possible, but others are not.

In the case of money, a negative answer may or may not be valid. If
you are just spending money from a basic checking account, a negative
balance means that you are overdrawn--but it DOES still have meaning,
because you now owe that much money to the bank. If you have an
account with automatic overdraft protection, the negative balance
means that you have borrowed that much and have to pay it back. So
how to interpret the negative result depends on the situation; often
positive and negative are just two sides of the same coin, each with
its own interpretation.

The idea of negative numbers was often considered suspect even into
the 1800's. I've read a book by a mathematician of that time trying
to present algebra in a way that didn't treat negative numbers as
real; he called them fictitious, and presented them as just a
shorthand for operations that should properly be done in reverse. But
he admitted that using negative numbers made the work easier,
always gave the right answer (when interpreted correctly), and
unified what would otherwise have required several cases (depending
on which number is greater, for example). That is, negative numbers
serve as a good, though imperfect, MODEL--you don't have to recognize
the existence of the negative numbers themselves as concrete entities
in order to make good use of them. (And, by the way, even counting
numbers are really an abstract concept too--you never saw a "three"
by itself, did you? ALL numbers live in the math world, not the real
one.)

What we are doing when we use negative numbers is translating a real
problem into a problem about, say, locations on a number line (which
correspond to amounts of money you have or owe, say), solving that
new problem, and then deciding how to translate the answer back into
the real world problem. The negative numbers live in this separate
world of math, and may have various meanings or lack of meaning in
the real world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.