Enlighten and the free-mason logo (now off topic - on the nature of mathematics)
" Rofl.. IGN: Reynold_Hawke
|
|
" I thought they didn't change the game. Isn't it Empower they changed? Also I'm always kinda surprised what people are able to see in certain things. I didn't even look at enlighten well enough to see anything but some triangles in there. Personally the only reason why these small little buggers are even having such symbols is to easier distinguish them... I doubt that there is any incentive to tell a message with them^^ |
|
" LOL, maybe he's talking about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMqS9Jer1ws Or, on a more disturbing note, this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt5VO_GAcvc Last edited by RogueMage#7621 on Jan 9, 2014, 6:27:48 PM
|
|
" Crap, fed bad info. At least my faith in GGG's artist integrity is still intact. He edited this after I saw it. I'm mostly glad GGG didn't change it with one guy complaining. Ok, continue arguing, hopefully the side that wants it changed doesn't win. Fuck censorship! Finished 17th in Rampage - Peaked at 11th
Finished 18th in Torment/Bloodline 1mo Race - peaked at 9th Null's Inclination Build 2.1.0 - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1559063 Summon Skeleton 1.3 - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1219856 |
|
" Eh, math isn't really that unambiguous. I mean, sure, 2 + 2 = 4 abstractly represents two apples added two an already existing group of two appels creates a single group of four apples... but you can't represent a single apple by the number 1, because apples are not discrete things of being. Apples have different weights and molecular constitutions, no apple identical to one another, they maybe aren't even closely similar to one another when put under scrutiny - if you cannot add like things to create a sum of like things, then the original statement is false? Math is pretty good at giving us reasonable and predictable approximations of "real" things but I don't think we're even close to representing "real" things with numbers yet - technically, "real" things, like "real" numbers are not discrete; the number 1 is both 1, 0.999... and 1.000...; the number of numbers between 0.999 and 1.000 is infinitely many; the concept of infinity only exists inside the human mind - there's no physical or "real" representation of it that can be made on paper or in words - things that are real are, and that's the most intelligent statement you can make. My Keystone Ideas: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/744282 Last edited by anubite#0701 on Jan 9, 2014, 6:23:04 PM
|
|
|
anubite, you are falling into the trap of equating mathematics with physical objects.
Mathematics is abstract. Yes it has practical applications, but when you start using apples instead you are making an approximation (which is technically what physics is). So while 2+2 = 4, when you go 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 apples, you are more looking at it through a physicists eyes, going 'apples are roughly considered to be discrete, so each apple is a '1', despite as you said this not necessarily being true. Also infinity is something mathematicians deal with plenty, so doesn't mean much. But yeah, math is the absolute truth, something is either correct or wrong, there is no 'sort of correct' in math. Physics is close to this being the real world applciation of math (in general), but as it uses approximations it isn't the same absolute |
|
" Thank you, sir. This made my day, laughed my ass off. Last edited by Baelrog#0263 on Jan 9, 2014, 6:53:29 PM
|
|
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principia_Mathematica http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tractatus_Logico-Philosophicus "the premier Action RPG for hardcore gamers." -GGG Happy hunting/fishing Last edited by Wittgenstein#0994 on Jan 9, 2014, 8:23:45 PM
|
|
" So you're saying math is always right, unless it's applied to the real world. I don't see how that indicates its "absolute truth", nevermind is very useful or something we can even discuss intelligently. Firstly, for there to be an absolute truth, we would need to agree that the sum of four ones is four. While this works abstractly if we wave our hands at inconvenient details... I've already indicated where issues crop up. If all you want to say is, "Well, four ones is four." But then not try to define what each "one" is trying to represent... what's the point? What truth have we stated? It's meaningless. Very few things in the "real" world are integers - and even if they are integers in the real world, The problem is, that to fly yourself to the moon, you need measurements and calculations that are least 10E15 in significance - if you're off by that 15th digit, you might go flying into Neptune or out into the void of space for all eternity. That's just the moon - something barely a breath from our little planet. If we require such enormous accuracy to put a person on a planet, then think of how astronomically accurate and precise we need to be, in order to quantify more complex "truths". It doesn't help that computers can only calculate finite numbers and many truths we'd like to know require the ability to calculate so-called "infinite" sequences. Mathematics is a tool that lets us get some grasp of the world around us, and sure, I'm not really a mathematician, but even they aren't so arrogant to try and present their work as "absolute truth". Mathematics is a language all swept up in the mind of man, it's very, very hard to find pretty integers "naturally" in the universe, thus it's hard to put even into numbers basic, so-called absolute truths. If you define "absolute" truth as truth that has no nagging quality to it (Like, for instance, I could say "The sky is blue" -- however, "blue" is a color which differs to every human being due to how our brain interprets light rays and wavelengths; blue is not a uniform sensation or agreed-upon, absolute term), then there's very little that's useful that can be said or discussed -- all conventional truth has some assumption or perspective-based meaning tied to it, which in turn makes it merely a half-truth or worse. My Keystone Ideas: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/744282 Last edited by anubite#0701 on Jan 9, 2014, 8:37:35 PM
|
|
|
anubite, you don't seem to understand what I am trying to say by absolute truth.
There are two fields of mathematics, practical and abstract. You seem not to be understanding that abstract mathematics is a thing. Yes, there needs to be definitions to DISCUSS it, but the fact of the fact of the fact is, in base 10, the numeral 2 + numeral 2 is numeral 4. It doesn't matter if you translate language, ignore language completely, etc, this is a fundamental fact. Now if we apply mathematics to the real world, yes, you do come into inconsistencies, and error margins. That is where physics is situated. Physics always have inherent error margins, when a physicist says 2 + 2 = 4 he really means 2 +- 0.5 (assuming 1 sf), because thats the accuracy of the measurement, and teh 4 error is something that you would have to calculate to say how accurate that number 4 is. But thats NOT just the abstract part of the math. Another example is going onto a PC calculator, going square root of 4 - 2. This is mathematically 0, but a computer will show a very small amount because the base 10 numbers for the equation can't be stored accurately in base 2. This is an error in the conversion of base's though, not in the actual calculation itself. Witt: while those articles are interesting, I am talking about much more basic mathematics than those more complex thoeroms, that if you can establish a base (ie base 10 for most normal mathematics) then you can make statements that are factual. That being said, does anyone know the proof of 1+1 = 2, cause its a god damn impossible proof |
|
