Is Global Warming a Hoax?

[Poopadoop]

Yes, but my point is that if infinitesimal means a value above zero that we cannot measure, then its reciprocal is a finite number that we also cannot measure. Thus, infinitesimal does not equal infinity.

If infinitesimal is undefined so should be its reciprocal I would think...

[OngBonga]

If infinitesimal is undefined so should be its reciprocal I would think...

Indeed, but if infinitesimal is >0, then its reciprocal is a value that is <infinity. Undefined, maybe, but only due to our limitations.

[Poopadoop]

Indeed, but if infinitesimal is >0, then its reciprocal is a value that is <infinity. Undefined, maybe, but only due to our limitations.

Depends how you look at it I guess. Still don't think 0 = infinity. By this logic then 2 = 1/2

[OngBonga]

Still don't think 0 = infinity. By this logic then 2 = 1/2

Yeah, and space isn't time, it's just that one can't exist without the other. To say they are the same is not accurate, but also to say they are different is not entirely accurate either. For example, multiplication and division. They are different functions. But are they? When we wish to multiply by x, we can divide by 1/x instead, and vice versa. So are they really that different?

If I have 2 apples, then it can be expressed as 2 times one apple, or one apple divided by 0.5. The numbers are only as different as the functions we're applying to them.

[Savy]

Yeah, and space isn't time, it's just that one can't exist without the other. To say they are the same is not accurate, but also to say they are different is not entirely accurate either. For example, multiplication and division. They are different functions. But are they? When we wish to multiply by x, we can divide by 1/x instead, and vice versa. So are they really that different?

If I have 2 apples, then it can be expressed as 2 times one apple, or one apple divided by 0.5. The numbers are only as different as the functions we're applying to them.

Do you understand what same and different mean? I don't think you do. Things that are similar are different, not the same.

And once again you need to start defining limiits because your statement about if we wish to multiply by x instead we can divide by 1/x in general isn't true.

[OngBonga]

...because your statement about if we wish to multiply by x instead we can divide by 1/x in general isn't true.

You're wrong.

678*46=31188
678/(1/46)=31188
46/(1/678)=31188

Take any two numbers, mulitply them together, note your answer, then divide one by the reciprocal of the other, and note your answer.

Apology accepted.

For a start the reciprocal of infinity isn't zero.

Again, you're wrong, although I can't actually prove this one.

This whole divide by 0 thing is nonsense. You can't divide by zero it is meaningless.

If this were true, then neither can you multiply by zero. Because... division and multiply are essentially the same function, just the inverse of one another. The proof is above, see the reciprocal sums.

Do you understand what same and different mean? I don't think you do. Things that are similar are different, not the same.

Nature is absolutely full of things that are different yet the same. Such as... space and time, energy and matter, magnetism and electricity, mulitplication and division, addition and subtraction. When two things are so intricstically linked that they cannot exist without the other, then for all intents and purposes, they are one and the same. It's no coincidence that the word "spacetime" exists and has meaning. Different apsects of the same thing. To say that "the same" and "different" are as black and white as you're suggesting, that implies that multiplication is as different to division as apples are. It's you who doesn't understand what "different" means.

What do you mean physicists can explain perfectly well what's going on?

That's not what I said. I said physics, not physicists. One day a physicist might be able to explain it, but that day hasn't come yet. That is because physicists don't yet fully understand physics.

[Poopadoop]

Nature is absolutely full of things that are different yet the same. Such as... space and time, energy and matter, magnetism and electricity, mulitplication and division, addition and subtraction.

'Different but related' is not the same as 'same'.

When two things are so intricstically linked that they cannot exist without the other, then for all intents and purposes, they are one and the same.

The word to describe this is 'interdependent', not 'identical'.

That's not what I said. I said physics, not physicists. One day a physicist might be able to explain it, but that day hasn't come yet. That is because physicists don't yet fully understand physics.

Fair point, but when one says 'physics', they generally mean 'the postulates of physics', not 'the entirety of information about the universe, known and unknown'. Also, the latter does not 'explain' anything because 'explain' is a verb meaning to make something understandable. The information itself does not make itself understandable, it needs someone to interpret it. That's where 'explain' comes in.

[Savy]

You're wrong.

678*46=31188
678/(1/46)=31188
46/(1/678)=31188

Take any two numbers, mulitply them together, note your answer, then divide one by the reciprocal of the other, and note your answer.

Apology accepted.

Good example of why proving statements in general can almost never be done by giving examples. You could give me an infinite amount of examples in this case and still be wrong, precisely because you only need one example that doesn't work which I know. I'll give you a hint I've already told you it's meaningless.

Again, you're wrong, although I can't actually prove this one.

The limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity is 0. This is not the same thing as 1/infinity = 0.

If this were true, then neither can you multiply by zero. Because... division and multiply are essentially the same function, just the inverse of one another. The proof is above, see the reciprocal sums.

No you can multiply by zero. Any number (note infinity isn't a number) multiplied by zero is zero. What you're doing is using an incorrect definition and attempting to work backwards. What you actually know is a nice little trick for manipulating fractions not the real definitions of mathematical terms.

Nature is absolutely full of things that are different yet the same. Such as... space and time, energy and matter, magnetism and electricity, mulitplication and division, addition and subtraction. When two things are so intricstically linked that they cannot exist without the other, then for all intents and purposes, they are one and the same. It's no coincidence that the word "spacetime" exists and has meaning. Different apsects of the same thing. To say that "the same" and "different" are as black and white as you're suggesting, that implies that multiplication is as different to division as apples are. It's you who doesn't understand what "different" means.

Once again the terms aren't interchangable in literally every single one of the examples you gave. They are linked, not the same. The words same means something but once again you think you can bastardise it's meaning and that's ok.

That's not what I said. I said physics, not physicists. One day a physicist might be able to explain it, but that day hasn't come yet. That is because physicists don't yet fully understand physics.

Ohh so you were making a meaningless statement. Something exists therefore physics will one day explain it in full. I'm not sure I agree but at least that statement is debatable rather than completely wrong like what I thought you were saying.