BE ME ON UNIVERSITY LECTURE

>BE ME ON UNIVERSITY LECTURE
>PROFESSOR IS ``PROVING'' A THEOREM
>I REALIZE WHAT HE IS TELLING US IS STRAIGHT UP BULLSHIT
>I IMMEDIATLY STAND UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LECTURE
>TELL HIM THAT WHAT HE MEANS BY PROOF IS ONLY VALID IF WE TAKE THE AXIOM OF INFINITY FOR GRANTED
>THE REST OF THE CLASS TURNS SILENT THE MOMENT I SPOKE
>PROFESSOR IS SPEECHLESS
>HE SAYS THERE IS NO REASON TO NOT ACCEPT THE EXISTENCE OF INFINITE SETS
>I YELL AT HIM THAT PUTTING AN ADJECTIVE IN FRONT OF A NOUN DOES NOT IN ITSELF MAKE A MATHEMATICAL CONCEPT. CANTOR WHO TURNED MATHEMATICS INTO A BAD JOKE DECLARED THAT AN INFINITE SET IS A SET WHICH IS NOT FINITE. ITS LIKE DECLARING THAT AN ALL-SEING LEPRECHAUN IS A LEPRECHAUN WHICH CAN SEE EVERYTHING. THESE GRAMMATICAL CONSTRUCTIONS DO NOT CREATE CONCEPTS, EXCEPTS PERHAPS IN A LITERARY OR POETIC SENSE.
>PROFESSOR IS VISIBLY NERVOUS AND STARTS SHAKING
>HE HAS NO ARGUMENTS AND TELLS ME TO LEAVE THE LECTURE HALL FOR DISTURBING THE CLASS
>THE REST OF THE CLASS STANDS UP WITH ME AND SAYS THAT IF IM EXPELLED FROM THE LECTURE THEY WILL LEAVE TOO
>PROFESSOR STARTS CRYING AND DECIDES TO LEAVE THE LECTURE HALL IN TEARS AND ASHAMED
>EVERYONE STARTS CLAPPING FOR ME AND CHANTING MY NAME

Other urls found in this thread:

myanimelist.net/anime/14741/Chuunibyou_demo_Koi_ga_Shitai
abstrusegoose.com/511
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewes's_number
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

FUCK YEAH CAPS LOCK LOOK AT ME IM FUCKING COOOOOOL FUCK YEAHHHH

Keep up the fight. Math can still be saved.

WILD BERG ER
WILD BERG ER
WILD BERG ER
WILD BERG ER

kys you are self

>OP envisions himself as this

god that was so cringy

What are your preferred axioms?

There's an infinite set of distances between me and you

And then, as the clapping stops, a timid voice asks: "How many natural numbers are there?"

Sauce?

I'll take "shit that never happened" for 500, josh

more like

>I IMMEDIATLY STAND UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LECTURE
>TELL HIM THAT WHAT HE MEANS BY PROOF IS ONLY VALID IF WE TAKE THE AXIOM OF INFINITY FOR GRANTED
>THE REST OF THE CLASS STARTS LAUGHING THE MOMENT I SPOKE

As many as the number of physical particles that exists in the universe of course. It’s something that cannot be deduced from theory alone

>How many natural numbers are there?
>As many as the number of physical particles that exists in the universe of course.

protip: Mathematics ≠ physics

Suddenly you discover a new particle in the universe, now all of your previous mathematics is false and you have to start from scratch again while real mathematics still holds regardless of new discoveries.

HELP! The number of natural numbers keeps changing!

Since math is invented and not discovered, there is no problem with making up your own math. Just like they do with """"""imaginary"""""" numbers.

what will break if we assume that infinities exist? other than your feels ofc

myanimelist.net/anime/14741/Chuunibyou_demo_Koi_ga_Shitai

>It’s something that cannot be deduced from theory alone
Math is entirely theory you fucking clown

>How many natural numbers are there?

The Earth's radius is 3,956.549 miles.

That means the volume between the Earth and the Firmament is 4.709,547,7 x 109 ft3.

That is 3.1587489 x 1099 Planck volumes!

But we may get a more rigorous estimate by adding the time dimension to it.

Over the total 6,000 years of lifetime of the universe, there's been 3.5097447 x 1054 Planck times!

That gives us a total of 11.086,402 x 10153 as an upper bound of things that can ever exist at any instant t, at least until now since the beginning.

There can be no integer greater than 11.086,402 x 10153, that would contradict physics.

As time passes, that number will of course increase, but for now, Occam's razor tells us not to consider these integers.

lmao

Reminds me of this...
abstrusegoose.com/511

>AND THE STUDENT'S NAME WAS ALBERT EINSTEIN

Welcome back to the Nineteenth Century, Cadet Capslock.

I know it's a jokepost but this argumentation will be useful for the these flat earth-esque finitecucks anyways:
>come up with theory that requires a property to be true for all natural numbers
>luckily, it is true for every number up until 11.086,402 x 10153
>use theory everywhere
>suddenly, there are more natural numbers OUT OF NOWHERE
>there is a natural number for which the property doesn't hold anymore now
>everything was wrong and you have to start again
>but that's okay because it wasn't real mathematics so you try again but fail but that's okay because it wasn't real mathematics so you try again but fail but that's okay because it wasn't real mathematics so you try

Does Zero exist?

Axiom of Choice and, in all ways except physical, a wolf.

(I'm assuming "10153" is supposed to be "1e153")
That's trivial whenever you compute the number of possible arrangements of a group of items.
And even THAT is infinitesimal compared with Skewe's Number.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewes's_number

It's been VASTLY reduced since it was first calculated and we now know that "there exists a number x violating π(x) < li(x) below e 727.951346801 < 1.3971821 × 10^316
It could be reduced even further, assuming the Riemann hypothesis."

There's a particularly egregious thread running elsewhere on Veeky Forums claiming "mathematicians are no longer needed since all problems can be solved by computer."
Obviously started by a brainlet who knows zilch about what mathematicians do.

nice fanfic

is this Veeky Forums's wet fantasy?

number theory is not real mathematics

...