A second can be broken up infinitely, yet we experience the passing of time. Why is this?
A second can be broken up infinitely, yet we experience the passing of time. Why is this?
Owen Moore
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Jaxson Scott
How come X? Things are how they are, there's no "reason" for them.
More intuitively, we have a model in which this holds: a sum of an infinite amount of numbers can be finite. Take the series 1/2^n which sums to 1.
Nathan Kelly
>1/2^n = 1
Can you break this down for me?
Thomas Jackson
A second can't actually be broken up infinitely though, not in reality.
Samuel Flores
>planck time, beach
Sebastian Nguyen
Owen Bennett
Then numbers aren't real.
Jayden Miller
What does ^ mean and what does n mean?
Joseph Collins
it's an example in the context of mathematics: there exists a logical system where a "sum" of infinite things is "finite". it's a heuristic that shows you there's no reason to believe that happening is strange.
Noah Howard
How can the sims of infinite .5's be finite?
Leo Stewart
It's not the sum of infinite .5s, it's the sum of 1/(2^n)
Logan Roberts
So 1 divided by 2 squared by an integer? I stopped doing maths at 14.
James Young
Yeah, pretty much. It's the sum of .5+.25+.125... and so on. Pic related from the wikipedia article they linked you really helps you visualize how the sum of all those numbers is one.
Kevin Ross
They aren't. You can't find them physically existing anywhere in the universe.
Matthew Campbell
Shit! It's the Fibonacci sequence.
Nathan Anderson
>the sum
>what are limits
Ryan Rodriguez
A meter can be broken up infinitely, yet we can still walk around. Why is this this?
Dominic Hall
This is something I would like to know.
Jacob Campbell
you are confusing infinite amount with infinite number. there might be an infinite number of parts, but they will still sum to a finite amount.
once again, wittgenstein is right. philosophy is just clarifying linguistic obfuscation
Aiden Fisher
>philosophy is just clarifying linguistic obfuscation
Wait I thought that was obvious. Was that not obvious to everyone?
Adam Hill
idiots
idiot, that's a broad oversimplification of his thesis. it's not obvious, it's very complicated.
Owen Taylor
Samefag not detected. Nice try imposter.
Zachary Howard
what? i'm and i'm not
Leo Powell
>infinitely
that's where you are wrong, kid.
Nolan Hall
fuck off, zeno
Cooper White
Yeah, that's what I was saying. The other user replied to my post as if they were answering the question, but I was expecting you to answer it. (If you were going to answer it, I mean.)
Charles Sanchez
so now you're 15?
Sebastian Smith
>time is the lie integration of a generic spacetime-like object, such as the poincare lie algebra
this DOES account for stochastic problems because the global structure of timelike structures can not be determined by local data
Ryder Howard
>A second can be broken up infinitely
What makes you believe this baseless claim?
Jack Williams
Go away, Zenu