Why is it square root 2?

Luckily it doesnt matter what I write because you knew I meant A = B+C root something

>Physics is subset of math
Haha I said no mathematical autists :D

Anyways, im outta here. I can recognize when Veeky Forums doesn't know the answer to the question. I seek answer elsewhere.

>Everything true in maths apply to physics.
Anything can be "true" in maths depending on your axioms.

What was even the point of that?

>square root 2
>implying

The fact that you don't understand the answer doesn't mean Veeky Forums doesn't know the answer, brainlet.

Veeky Forums is that way

Science is NEVER meant to be productive

scientists just do random stuff and economists or other retards pick random stuff from the work of random scientists and of these random outcomes some happen to be "productive" in some random peoples perspective and they begin to enforce those selected random pairs

>Baby math
>”scientists”
Thought you had already left the thread

Norm is too good for this world. He should be writing the syllabus.

You don't fuck around with edges, OP. It's a square of area 2, that's all.

>no autists please
>calls sides of a triangle vectors

Let me rephrase OP's question.

how do you "write" in math? I just can take screenshots to show square roots

Have a look at LaTex tutorial
sites.google.com/site/scienceandmathguide/

[math]y=\sqrt{2x^2} = \sqrt{2}*x[/math]
If x is a non-zero rational number, then [math]\sqrt{2}*x[/math] is irrational, thus the only rational solution is x = y = 0

>If x is a non-zero rational number, then 2√∗x is irrational,
proof required

It's a pain in the ass to write a rigorous proof for that. It's left for the reader as an exercise. Just use Pythagoras' method.

Brainlet question from biofag. What really is it then and why do we use it?

In metaphysics, nominalism is a philosophical view which denies the existence of universals and abstract objects, but affirms the existence of general or abstract terms and predicates.[1] There are at least two main versions of nominalism. One version denies the existence of universals – things that can be instantiated or exemplified by many particular things (e.g., strength, humanity). The other version specifically denies the existence of abstract objects – objects that do not exist in space and time.[2]

Most nominalists have held that only physical particulars in space and time are real, and that universals exist only post res, that is, subsequent to particular things.[3] However, some versions of nominalism hold that some particulars are abstract entities (e.g., numbers), while others are concrete entities – entities that do exist in space and time (e.g., pillars, snakes, bananas).

Nominalism is primarily a position on the problem of universals, which dates back at least to Plato, and is opposed to realist philosophies, such as Platonic realism, which assert that universals do exist over and above particulars. However, the name "nominalism" emerged from debates in medieval philosophy with Roscellinus.

>quantized to nearest physically possible distance
>space is discrete
explain yourself

Let's do it by CA

Let it be known that [math]\sqrt{2}[/math] is an irrational number.

Now we assume that [math]\sqrt{2}*\frac{a}{b} = \frac{c}{d}[/math] holds for some non-zero rational numbers [math]\frac{a}{b}[/math] and [math]\frac{c}{d}[/math]

However, [math]\sqrt{2}*\frac{a}{b} = \frac{c}{d} \Leftrightarrow \sqrt{2}
= \frac{bc}{ad}[/math] where by definition [math]\frac{bc}{ad}[/math] is a rational number, which is a contradiction.

>triangle
>physics
gtfo fgt pls

Not him, but if we for example use atoms, then we are working with discrete units limited by the definition of the atomic radius. It doesn't necessarily involve space quantization.

In the proof of sqrt is irrational, you show that sqrt 2 = a/b leads to a contradiction.

If you instead let sqrt 2 = x*a / b you have a rational times a rational. So you have
Sqrt 2 = c / b. Still leads to the same contradiction by fta.

There is space between atoms.

Which is included in lattice parameters.

It can equal almost anything you want since you haven't defined which space it's in.

Why are physicists such brainlets?

[math]\emptyset[/math]

Atoms are discrete; the void is continuous.

Anyway, we have a metric in Physics; it's called [math]c[/math].