Who /finitist/ here?

What's the last decimal point of Pi?

talk to us about your finitist theory of real analysis user
and please, we want to hear everything about how you solve ODEs

not only that by if we designate a beginning to the circle, the point we begin walking, its end is when we reach that point again. It's like saying a rubber band is infinite because it has no defined ending point. That's gay.

This is why math is retarded
Nothing you just said is any different than the standard definition of infinity, you just dressed it up in different wording and said it was "proved"

You can ignore him anyway because this isn't how anything in mathematical logic works regardless, except as a shorthand.

Axioms of, say, arithmetic do not assume a domain of discourse, and that poster is confusing a prior given infinite set satisfying axioms with the construction of an infinite set (no such thing is constructed, it is assumed: this is the axiom of infinity).

>I ignore a problem so it doesn't exist
The only person you're trolling is yourself

Until you die?
Or are we talking about something that runs forever. Hmmm, seems like you are assuming what you want to prove?

>starts with assumption infinity exists
>build mathematical concepts around the assumption
>using the built concepts to prove infinity exists

>real world
>math
ok

What's the largest number?

>falls for finite meme.
A finite thing is bounded. A collection of finite things is still bounded. How do finite things bound themselves? Any infinite thing trivially solves this problem. Finitists BTFO

If infinityfags have to assume the existence of Groethendieck universes to avoid cardinal autism, why not just assume the existence of a Groethendieck integer?

The largest number is countable :^)

...

Infinity is not a rigorous value because pic related can be proven true.

No it can't

1/3 > 0.3
1/3 > 0.33
1/3 > 0.333
1/3 > 0.3333
1/3 > 0.33333
1/3 > 0.333333
1/3 > 0.3333333
1/3 > 0.33333333
1/3 > 0.333333333
1/3 > 0.3333333333
1/3 > 0.33333333333
1/3 > 0.333333333333
1/3 > 0.3333333333333
1/3 > 0.33333333333333
1/3 > 0.333333333333333
1/3 > 0.3333333333333333
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333
1/3 > 0.333333333333333333
1/3 > 0.3333333333333333333
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333
1/3 > 0.333333333333333333333
1/3 > 0.3333333333333333333333
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333333
...
dunno about you but it looks like if we continued comparing more and more 3's, we'll always get the same result that 1/3 is greater.

/pol/ trying to win argument by obfuscating details.
None of those are the equation from the picture. Please submit an appropriate form.

The sentence is the equation from the picture. Learn to read lol.

Sorry, i missed the equation in sentence format at university.
Fucking /pol/

you mean -1/12

1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333310
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333311
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333312
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333313
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333314
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333315
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333316
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333317
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333318
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333319
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333320
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333321
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333322
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333323
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333324
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333325
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333326
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333327
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333328
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333329
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333330
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333331
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333332
1/3 > 0.33333333333333333333333
...
dunno about you but it looks like if we continued adding more and more 1's, we'll always get the same result that 1/3 is greater.

You apparently missed learning division in elementary school is what you meant to say.
>m-muh /pol/ bogeyman

>I don't know how the decimal system works

>i hate lines and circles too

1/3 = 0.3 + 1/30
1/3 = 0.33 + 1/300
1/3 = 0.333 + 1/3000
1/3 = 0.333... + 1/inf
dunno about you but it looks like if we continued adding more and more 3's, we'll always get the same result that 1/3=1/3

>1/inf

Also you can't increment to infinity.

All this tells you is that the sequence you're looking at is bounded above by 1/3. In fact, from here you can demonstrate the limit of said sequence must be 1/3. And so in fact you have started the proof of the fact 0.33.. = 1/3.

Uhh.. no.

You cannot reach the boundary. It's unbounded.

Quickmaths.

retards that have never heard or used calculus

Choose any number x such that x < 1/3. There exists an integer m such that

x < 0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + ... + 0.(n zeros)3

for all n >= m. Therefore, 0.333... cannot be equal to any value less than 1/3.

Prove infinity is not well defined by finding the largest number

Not believing in infinity doesn't necessitate believing in a highest number. If you add any number of rationals together you'll get another rational. There's no maximum number you can add after which this breaks down, and yet supposedly after infinite summations you can have an irrational number.

Finitists don't necessarily believe that there's a largest natural numbers, but they do believe you can't put all the naturals into one set.

0.333...
just did it

so youlre saying that there is no limit to natural numbers?
Isn't basically infinity?

You fucking retard. Thats not what your math says at all.

...

Holy shit this is the dumbest post ever posted on sci.

Screenshotted

Point out which nth step in will produce the infinite'th 3

thats clearly just 3 threes.

The infinite'th nth step. Are you retarded?

You can't increment to infinity. Are you retarded?

>abstractions about infinity are too hard for me

maybe math is not for you, calculus must give you a headache, poor guy

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasses

Nigger you don't even know how to do division and you're calling me bad at math? Cut off your penis with a butter knife, my man.

nice avoiding my points, you must be in the humanities

>can't do math or read

Ellipses aren't numbers.

>can't abstract about infinity
>never did calculus or understand it

You would kill yourself if they offered a course in suicide at school, wouldn't you...?

You obviously can't think and only know how to do what you were told to do to get a gradr in a course, even though because you can't think you also don't actually understand what you were taught.

Kill yourself or leave sci just dont post anymore.

>>>/reddit/atheism is that way, fedora.

If you used calculus doesn't mean you understand it.

>infinity too spooky
retards

numbers don't exist in the first place, friend. they're also a meaningless abstraction

Infinity is defined as a value larger than numbers, which means it isn't a number. You lack reading comprehension and basic logic by refusing to understand what you were taught about infinity is complete bullshit and absolutely worthless.

i never said infinity is a number

That jewish statement is meaningful, but sky jew worshipers misunderstand it.

Infinity is not defined as a value.

wrong

Anyone ever found it weird with 1 simple division you can make any repeating set of decimal values except the numbers that only have nines?
9/9 = 1
99/99 = 1
999/999 = 1
9999/9999 = 1
99999/99999 = 1

98/99 =0.989898...
998/999 = 0.998998998...
...
theres no way to differentiate numbers made from 9's, and the only way to make a repeating 9 number from a division would be [math]\frac{\bar{9}}{1\bar{0}[/math]

It doesnt matter what you fucking say it is lmfao. Holy shit. Do you actually believe you are important?

are you retarded? you were going on and on about what i know about infinity like you know anything and i responded
fucking moron

[math]\frac{\bar{9}}{1 \bar{0}}[/math]

It doesn't exist.

>symbols can't mean other symbols

>sophism
As expected from stupid christcuck nigger.

Of course you couldn't figure from the obvious that I meant your intepretation of infinity was what didn't matter.

Infinity isn't on the numberline. You can't increment to it. You can "use" it to say that one could count "infinitely" on the numberline, but you can't use it in lieu of a number. Now if you want to agree to that, you have to accept there is no infinite'th step in long division of 1/3 that would differ from comparison's sake to defy innumerably proveably true circumstances that denote no matter how many 3's exist in the decimal, [math]0.\bar{3} < \frac{1}{3}[/math], because there cannot actually exist an infinite amount of 3's, if not by loose definition then just because infinity is not a number and therefore cannot rationalize as an amount.

>Not believing in infinity doesn't necessitate believing in a highest number. If you add any number of rationals together you'll get another rational.
So you can repeat this process of adding as many times as you want?
Without an end?
As IN no FINIshing sTEp?
Hmmmmmmm, if only we had a word for this concept of no end...
Really...
Makes...
Me...
Think?

>actually exist
nothing in math 'actually exist'
go back to kindergarden

yes there can, that bar placed above the 3 indicates exactly that, that there are an infinite number of 3's, that's the point of the bar

>there cannot actually exist an infinite amount of 3's
durrr, if it can't actually exist better to just ignore and stick my head in the ground
with only people like you we wouldn't have extended the number line into negatives

Its a description of present and ongoing action, it's not a description of past tense. You can (potentially) do something infinitely, like sum numbers. You can't have summed an infinite amount of numbers, however, for that implies an end occurred, and an end defines it as finite.

Infinity is legitamately the dumbest shit ever conceived, and worse yet it has no practical usage in any virtue of engineering. It's a dumb idea underpinned by also being needlessly useless to anyone's efforts.

In attempts of justifyinf infinity you just refused to acknowledge that numbers exist and you're telling me to go back to kindergarten even though you're the one who just forfeit your ability to fucking count?

what about negative numbers, do they exist? if so, show proof of them in the real world

Negative three isn't on the numberline. You can't increment to it. You can "use" it to say that one could count "negatively" on the numberline, but you can't use it in lieu of a number. Now if you want to agree to that, you have to accept there is no negative first step in long subtraction of 3 that would differ from comparison's sake to defy innumerably provably true circumstances that denote no matter how many negative signs exist in the number, [math]-3 < (0-3)[/math], because there cannot actually exist a negative amount of 3, if not by loose definition then just because negative three is not a number and therefore cannot positivize as an amount.

>numbers exist
Numbers are abstractions of qualities, not existing things in themselves. You can pick up a rock, or look at a sunset, or pick up radio waves and listen to a broadcast news program. You can't interact physically with the abstract concept of the number 5.

This is recursively retarded. You want to say [math]0.\bar{3} = \frac{1}{3}[/math] because you believe the bar means "infinite threes", even though it is well established that there is no such thing as an infinite amount of something because infinity is not a number. The bar over the three doesnt mean infinite. It means there is a pattern of ongoing repetition.
1/3 > 0.3
1/3 > 0.33
1/3 > 0.333
You can continue extending more threes into the decimal in a repeating, ongoing pattern, and 1/3 will always be greater than that decimal value.

Existence is a state of being. If you dont believe 3 exists, you are in a state of being completely fucking retarded.

Just like pepe the frog

you'll never get to infinity just by adding repetitions one at a time, to get to infinity to have to add infinity repetitions
see how it works? retard

ok "finitists" whats the largest number

Infinity is not a number. Let me fix your post [math]senpai[/math]

>you'll never get to a lot just by adding repetitions one at a time, to get to a lot you have to add a lot of repetitions
see how it works? i'm retarded

In mathematics, 0.999... (also written [math]0. \bar{9}[/math], among other ways), denotes the repeating decimal consisting of infinitely many 9 after the decimal point (and one 0 before it).

...

countable and uncountable infinities are both infities

How about a real answer there is such a thing as countable infinities i.e. the fucking natural numbers

numbers are what they are, they 'exist' like a dollar 'exists'
They are not pebbles that a monkey plays with, like you do.

You won't get a real answer because finitists are all troll or legitimately insane