Originally posted by @fabianfnas You proposed your fact that apples are all the same. Your fact is wrong.
Every apple is unique! Do you still deny this true fact?
When will you acknowledge the obvious?
I said all apples in the group. I assumed all the same variety at the same ripeness.
Get a bunch of red apples the same size without blemish. See if you can tell the difference. Expand the idea by using same numbers of 19 lb bags, unbagged of course.
You can then show yourself to be a liar if you continue to say you could identify the original groups.
All red delicious apples without blemish and similar size appear too similar to distinguish in such groups.
Originally posted by @freakykbh Those silly little exercises do more harm than good in their gross oversimplification of complex topics, even if they do offer a limited perspective on things otherwise unconsidered.
If the instructor really wanted people to think about racism, they could have had put all the lemons into one basket (so to speak) and then asked a random person to not only find their own, but to align all the rest to their "owners."
When there are only two people in the audience that kind of falls apart.
Originally posted by @eladar I said all apples in the group. I assumed all the same variety at the same ripeness.
Get a bunch of red apples the same size without blemish. See if you can tell the difference. Expand the idea by using same numbers of 19 lb bags, unbagged of course.
You can then show yourself to be a liar if you continue to say you could identify the original groups.
...[text shortened]... icious apples without blemish and similar size appear too similar to distinguish in such groups.
Twist the problem and avoid the question.
You say that apples are all identical. I'm not. Who is the liar?
Originally posted by @fabianfnas Twist the problem and avoid the question.
You say that apples are all identical. I'm not. Who is the liar?
You make a faulty assumption. You assumed your assumption is correct then are unwilling to accept clarification. You demonstrate yourself to be an arrogant jerk. Typical enough for chess players.
Originally posted by @eladar If you had one apple, 4apples and 16 apples and put them on a table, could you tell which apples belonged in group of one, four and sixteen?
1+4+16=21 because you can't distinguish between the apples once you put them together.
Okay, you are in that mode. Let's start from beginning again...
You say apples cannot be distinguished one from another.
I say you're wrong. Every apple is unique.
Without changing the topic - do you still think you're right? That all apples are exactly the same? As you wrote.
Originally posted by @freakykbh Those silly little exercises do more harm than good in their gross oversimplification of complex topics, even if they do offer a limited perspective on things otherwise unconsidered.
If the instructor really wanted people to think about racism, they could have had put all the lemons into one basket (so to speak) and then asked a random person to not only find their own, but to align all the rest to their "owners."
Originally posted by @eladar There you go telling me what you believe that I implied.
If you don't mean what you write, then why do you write it in the first place?
Admit that you are wrong, if you are serious, and we can take it from there.
Originally posted by @fabianfnas If you don't mean what you write, then why do you write it in the first place?
Admit that you are wrong, if you are serious, and we can take it from there.
I did mean what I wrote. If you can't tell the difference then they appear to be exactly the same.
This is why people believe as they do. This is why Humy couldn't understand why (g^2-1)/(g-1) isn't exactly the same as g+1. He was taught that things that are equal are exactly the same. One example used with children is apples. 3 red apples + 2 red apples = 5 red apples because when you put the two groups together you get 5 red apples that you can't separate into their original groups.
Face it. You were wrong about i making it possible to find an inverse for the squared function. You are wrong here too.
Originally posted by @eladar ...when you put the two groups together you get 5 red apples that you can't separate into their original groups.
in what sense can they not "separate into their original groups"?
I can physically separate them into their original groups so I assume you mean in some other sense than 'physically'? right?
Originally posted by @humy in what sense can they not "separate into their original groups"?
I can physically separate them into their original groups so I assume you mean in some other sense than 'physically'? right?
Yes, you can if the apples are different enough and you have long enough to inspect them.
If I present them on the table and they are all the same kind of apple without distinguishing features and I put them in a bag and mix them, would you be able to put them back into their correct groups?
Usually these topics are taught to younger kids who would be even less likely to be able to split them back up into their original groups. Some things taught to kids early on are then needed to be corrected later on, otherwise people believe things that are not true.
Originally posted by @eladar If I present them on the table and they are all the same kind of apple without distinguishing features and I put them in a bag and mix them, would you be able to put them back into their correct groups?
why is the individual identity of each apple relevant to how many are in each group or whether I can split them into smaller groups? What is stopping me from just splitting the group of 5 apples into a group of 2 and a a group of 3 while not caring about whether it is the same apples that end up in each group?
Usually these topics are taught to younger kids who would be even less likely to be able to split them back up into their original groups.
as far as I am aware the concept of adding is NEVER taught that way to younger kids. Why would any teacher insist to the kids to split them back up into their 'original' in particular rather than just split them up? It is obvious that which particular apple is put in which group is irrelevant to the number of apples in each group and telling the kids that info is relevant to the number in each group will only confuse them into believing a falsehood of relevancy where none exists. As far as I am aware that is never done. I am pretty sure that I for one was never taught about adding and/or number THAT way!
I remember a Scientific American article about this, seems impossible but true. i wonder if there could be a connection of this to space time, if spacetime was proven to be quantized, like 'chunks' of spacetime stuff Planck's length and time or some such maybe you could generalize that to the big bang and how other precursor big bangs and daughter big bangs could produce whole universes we cannot ATT access.
Originally posted by @humy why is the individual identity of each apple relevant to how many are in each group or whether I can split them into smaller groups? What is stopping me from just splitting the group of 5 apples into a group of 2 and a a group of 3 while not caring about whether it is the same apples that end up in each group?
[quote] Usually these topics are taught to young ...[text shortened]... ever done. I am pretty sure that I for one was never taught about adding and/or number THAT way!
You are wanting to split the group into their original groups. You need to put the exact same apples together in the same groups.
In any case that part isn't all important. What is important is the idea of being equal means exact same things on both sides.
One side just puts the two groups together.
Equal is used for other things in math later on as you have recently experienced.
What does equal mean
26 Sep '17 09:28
Back to Top