Everything is meaningless unless you yourself add meaning to it. What are you trying to get at? That we shouldn’t use math because you have one little trick that can make 1=2? Math has saved peoples lives. I mean look around at the modern world. Everything you see has been made using math. But, you have a little trick that can make 1=2, thus making it meaningless.
For one thing, I don’t believe in anything, I go by probability. The probability of math being benificial to humanity is extremely high. Look at our space programs, everything involed in it is based on math. Math is the reason the apollo 13 returned saftly to earth without any casualties. We use math to build shelters to protect us from nature. Ever think about how you got your little trick to work? You had to use math. If math is meaningless then so is your little rant. I’ve used math plenty of times to see how useful it really is, and untill you can come up with a beter system, I will continue using it.
maths works but it ends in meaninglessness-there is a mystery as pointed out by colin leslie dean- if you dont find that interesting then why be on a philosophy forum
if you where around when they believed in a flat earth at the centre of the universe you would have gone along with the views simply because they worked
the Ptolemy’s system worked -and you would have believed it-but it was wrong
Life works but it too also ends in meaninglessness. Back when we thought the world was flat, I wouldn’t say I “believed” it was, but more or less the probability of it being flat with the technology we currently had would be pretty high. The thing with probability is one variable can dramatically change it. Now I don’t mind you showing how you can make 1=2(That part is interesting), just when you add the word meaningless, it changes the whole conversation to math having meaning or not. Also you referring to colin in every post doesn’t help.
Meaning is subjective. When I count things, the meaning is to figure out how much of one thing i have. When I measure a piece of wood to build something, the meaning is to get the correct measurements to build a base structure. When I cook and I need to measure the amount of water or other substances… I could go on but I’m pretty sure your aware of this stuff. Math isn’t nessacarilly meaningless, it just has some faults that get overlooked.
Thats his own name.
He loves to impregnate the internet with it.
I guess that he doesn’t know that “he who blows his own horn is usually a solo act!” -Confucious
*__-
If your objective is to get me interested, why do you appear to try and attack mathematics? It would be more benificial to get a bunch of people interested then find a way that we can fix it, instead of attacking it and getting nowhere.
the paradox is not due to a fault in maths
the pradox results from accepted maths
and it shows 1=2 which means math is in contradiction ie it ends in meaninglessness -even though you can cook your dinner with it
Well lets put the whole meaninglessness aside for a second, shall we? I realize that everything is meaningless so this part I don’t really care about. The mystery on the other hand of why it works in reality if certain maths contradict intself is the interesting part that I want to try and understand.
I was simply saying your wasteing your breathe(Or thought), assumeing you have a limted amount. As to the question at hand, your post is of no use.
now we can start the real work
as noted the problem arises from the axiom of choice
if we abandon it then the paradox goes away
is if you abandon AC to avoid the paradox
but keep it for other forms of maths
you have a situation where there is a contradiction in maths ie AC invalid
for one aspect of math but not invalid for other forms of maths
thus maths has a contradiction thus ends in meaninglessness
The controversy was over how to interpret the words “choose” and “exists” in the axiom
note it is only by watering down the meaning of words that AC remains valid
for
If we follow the constructivists, and “exist” means “find,” then the axiom is false, since we cannot find a choice function for the nonempty subsets of the reals
if AC is false then the tarski paradox vanishes but so does a lot of maths-which might help you cook dinner
one thing to think about
1=2 being a contradiction is only a problem if you believe maths is consistent-this has not been proved so if you believe maths is consistent it can only be based on faith which is just like christians having faith in god
the fact might be that maths is inconsistent ie ends in meaninglessness as colin leslie dean claims then you trying to irradicate the paradox and make maths consistent is a wasted endevour and MANIPULATES THINGS IN ORDER TO CREATE A FALSE TRUTH
Ok, I use math merely as a tool. I also think that not all of the rules of math are set in stone. Math to me is not a religion, as I have said earlier, I believe (Or try) in nothing. I kinda think I understand what your saying though.