19 Jul '18 01:48>
The post that was quoted here has been removedYeah, yeah, yeah...we saw the movie too.
Originally posted by @joe-shmoIt was Zahanzi, not vivify. The post that initiated the exchange was the first one on page 17 of thread Thread 177012 My reply is fourth from bottom on the same page. Duchess's response is top of the next page.
I don't buy it. I know nothing of the continuum hypothesis, yet If I were reading your post about it and you mentioned it by name as simple google search of "continuum hyptho..." and google literally suggest "continuum hypothesis undecidable". from which I can skim through the text and pull the statement from Wolfram
"Together, Gödel's and Cohen's re ...[text shortened]... to tear the argument apart or verify it as long as the content was recognizable as mathematics.
Originally posted by @deepthoughtAs I suspected, its a short quip that reads like a line from Wikipedia. I don't see any deep mathematical analysis there, do you? You were talking of pure mathematical truth and she knew of a loophole. In fact, it seems like a very trivial piece of information for any admirer of mathematics to have. I personally have a range of mathematical familiarity that far exceeds my ability to competently perform it, and it was obtained by casually reading some math books.
It was Zahanzi, not vivify. The post that initiated the exchange was the first one on page 17 of thread Thread 177012 My reply is fourth from bottom on the same page. Duchess's response is top of the next page.
Originally posted by @humyI do not agree that the definition of a circle involves curvature. A circle is an object composed of points equidistant from a centre. In set builder notation, on the Euclidean plane we have the following:
Here I will start with the assumption that an infinitely large perfect circle (one with radius = +infinity) makes sense in pure geometry to then see if I can then make it continue to make sense or if I find it makes no sense.
An infinitely large perfect circle (one with radius = +infinity) would, on its infinite scale, have a curved line and not straight li ...[text shortened]... direction to form a random scribble on the infinite scale?
Any flaw with my above reasoning?
Originally posted by @humyCould it be that the shape of infinity is determined by gravity?
Here I will start with the assumption that an infinitely large perfect circle (one with radius = +infinity) makes sense in pure geometry to then see if I can then make it continue to make sense or if I find it makes no sense.
An infinitely large perfect circle (one with radius = +infinity) would, on its infinite scale, have a curved line and not straight li ...[text shortened]... direction to form a random scribble on the infinite scale?
Any flaw with my above reasoning?
The post that was quoted here has been removedNo....I think you came up with every bit of that elegant little morsel...all on your very own.
The post that was quoted here has been removedThe lovable, likable and ever-popular Duchess64 knows when to throw complimentary bones of knowledge to the wee knaves of Red Hot Pawn.
Originally posted by @deepthoughtI think I am finally getting what your are saying.
I do not agree that the definition of a circle involves curvature.
....
The curvature at a point on a curve K = 1/r where r is the radius of the circle whose centre is at the point at which two lines, normal to the curve, and arbitrarily close together meet. For a straight line the corresponding circle does not exist in C; but is in C*, being the infinite circle.