Why is it so hard to read what I’m saying, instead of forcing it all into something that sounds like a loaded question, under the guise of "well it’s just a simple yes or no question "
Why does it feel like you’re trying to trick me into warping what I’ve said into something you can dishonestly and dismissively construe as either dumb/malevolent/corrupt, when the reality is far from that?
Everything you need to know about what I’ve actually said is in my words. Excuse my suspicion of you, but it’s firmly justified by how you’ve been treating me so far. You haven’t presented yourself as trustworthy or honest one bit so far - can I trust that this has changed?
To be clear what I’m answering, I’m assuming that by “Sum the products”, you mean in calculating (1+1+1+…+1) * (1+1+1+…+1), yes?
In full answer, in case you’re trying to trick me:
At every step so far in this discussion I have calculated (1+1+1+…+1) * (1+1+1+…+1), where “…” is FINITE as (1+1+1+…+1)^2
At every step so far in this discussion I have calculated (1+1+1+…+1) * (1+1+1+…+1), where “…” is INFINITE as (1+1+1+…+1)
In both cases I have properly performed the calculation and did not make the mistake you thought I made.
To also clarify just in case, for the sum of: (1+1+1+…+1) + (1+1+1+…+1), where “…” is INFINITE, I used one method of adding term by term to get (2+2+2+…+2), which can both be presented correctly as 2 * (1+1+1+…+1), and again, where “…” is INFINITE and since “2” can obviously be presented as “1+1”, it can also be presented correctly as (1+1+1+…+1), again, where “…” is INFINITE. Hilbert’s Hotel was set up nearly 100 years ago to visualise these exact kinds of paradoxes when dealing with infinity, I am not communicating anything new or controversial here.
This is in contradiction to where “…” is FINITE, in which case (1+1+1+…+1) + (1+1+1+…+1) = 2 * (1+1+1+…+1), always.
Assuming what you mean is contained in the above, which sums up everything I have been saying in relation to mathematically operating on “infA”, at every step so far in this discussion, then I have properly “summed the products” every time so far in this discussion.
Now, are you going to disregard the correct distinctions that I’ve been making, in order to make out like I’ve said something obviously mistaken, even to me this whole time, which I’ve not actually done, and explained why several times?
Again, excuse me if you’ve taken a turn and are no longer trying to misrepresent me. It’s perfectly understandable if you thought I said something that I didn’t - there’s always room for improvement in everyone’s wording including my own, and I’m sorry if I’ve ever misled you - I’ve done my best to prevent this and rectify it where it appeared to me to be needed. At every step I’ve wanted to hear what others have to say about mistakes they think I’ve made and with 100% honesty I have always willed to accept them if they’ve validly been pointed out. Of course, if they’ve been incorrectly pointed out, I have done nothing but try to correct this with 100% honesty and with no intention to distract, or deny any truth at any point, even if anyone has believed this is not the case. Quid pro quo, to check if you’ve actually read any of this, let me ask you a question: have you read and understood everything I’ve said? This is a separate question to whether you agree with it, which you can answer too if you want, separately.