You are literally proving my point. You have used at least three different definitions when using the word “infinity”. THAT is what I mean when I say you need to define what is being referred to by “infinity”. It is not a single concept in mathematics.
To address your specific points:
ℵ₀ is the cardinality of countable infinities like natural numbers, rational numbers, etc.
If you attempt to find the summation of an infinite series, you approach infinity.
I never claimed that ℵ₀ is the summation of a set. You base so much of your commenr on a claim I never made.
I said that the natural numbers can be EVALUATED to either infinity or -1/12 and I made sure to define what I meant by infinity to be ℵ₀. If you think that it is incorrect that the natural numbers can be evaluated to -1/12, you have no place trying to correct others on mathematics. Just watch this eleven year old video by Numberphile for proof.
Your fundamental misunderstanding and flip-floppong between definitions of infinity male my point glaringly clear here.
Don’t be a dumbass and cite a fucking YouTube video to someone giving you definitions, i honestly guessed you were going to come with VSauce and Numberphile even before you made this reply because i watched them so many years ago.
I’ve studied these at uni, I’ve even cited the courses I’ve studied these from. So don’t go “your fundamental misunderstanding blah blah” bro you’re citing a YouTube video.
You’re only raging because the only defense you have is a YouTube video, which i already saw the proof of about 10 years ago.
At least give an actual insult instead of impotent “i guess you failed the course you don’t remember blah blah”, for a course I finished the second part of last semester. So no reason to forget it as I’m expected to use it still.
You should have read about the topic instead of whatever this response is.
You are the one devolving to ad hominem. You haven’t addressed a point I have made in your last two comments. You seem to think that a YouTube video is some lowly source that doesn’t warrant merit. How sad then that you were proven wrong by a youtube video. YOU are the one who lacks any defense because you KNOW you were wrong, and by failing to address my points with facts you are proving that point.
“how sad” sure I’m at uni and you need a YouTube video to defend yourself because you don’t know the subject matter, andyou are trying to get my attention.
You have more important stuff to do than continuing this thread, might i suggest reading about the subject matter on Wikipedia?
Lmao you replied to me in the first place, exactly how am I trying to get your attention? I already had it from the beginning…
You gripe about the merits of a youtube video (which I only linked to because I’m not gonna spell the whole damn proof out for you here), and you tell me to go read wikipedia? I’m guessing you are just being sarcastic there, because if not… sheesh. Yikes. Oof, even.
Wikipedia is extremely good for mathematics, that’s one, two is that the “proof” is inherently flawed as it leads to a very trivial contradiction.
I could walk you through the proof to so you how it’s wrong, but you are obviously more concerned with proving to a university student that your high school level understanding of maths is better because you saw a YouTube video.
Hahaha ok then show me how the proof is flawed? You will have a LOT of mathematicians and scientists extremely interested in your proof.
Also, I learned this stuff in high school, but I went to college a decade ago so… maybe when you get done with math 253 and get into some higher level courses that cover complex analysis, you will change your tune.
Wikipedia IS indeed great for mathematics, as is a youtube video from university professors who teach and apply these mathematics. Exactly what is wrong with a youtube video featuring high level math professors teaching concepts about mathematics? You just keep saying “durr your only defense is a youtube video” when it literally is not “my only defense” it is just a single source I used to prove you wrong. You never gave a rebuttal to my point, just tried to attack the source. You say you know about the video and the concept, but you still make false and baseless claims that I already proved wrong. You are simply butthurt that you were wrong.
You are literally proving my point. You have used at least three different definitions when using the word “infinity”. THAT is what I mean when I say you need to define what is being referred to by “infinity”. It is not a single concept in mathematics.
To address your specific points:
ℵ₀ is the cardinality of countable infinities like natural numbers, rational numbers, etc.
If you attempt to find the summation of an infinite series, you approach infinity.
I never claimed that ℵ₀ is the summation of a set. You base so much of your commenr on a claim I never made.
I said that the natural numbers can be EVALUATED to either infinity or -1/12 and I made sure to define what I meant by infinity to be ℵ₀. If you think that it is incorrect that the natural numbers can be evaluated to -1/12, you have no place trying to correct others on mathematics. Just watch this eleven year old video by Numberphile for proof.
Your fundamental misunderstanding and flip-floppong between definitions of infinity male my point glaringly clear here.
Don’t be a dumbass and cite a fucking YouTube video to someone giving you definitions, i honestly guessed you were going to come with VSauce and Numberphile even before you made this reply because i watched them so many years ago.
I’ve studied these at uni, I’ve even cited the courses I’ve studied these from. So don’t go “your fundamental misunderstanding blah blah” bro you’re citing a YouTube video.
Me citing a youtube video proved your statement wrong and this is your response.
Guessing you failed the class you were studying this in? Definitely doesn’t sound like you remember much.
You’re only raging because the only defense you have is a YouTube video, which i already saw the proof of about 10 years ago.
At least give an actual insult instead of impotent “i guess you failed the course you don’t remember blah blah”, for a course I finished the second part of last semester. So no reason to forget it as I’m expected to use it still.
You should have read about the topic instead of whatever this response is.
You are the one devolving to ad hominem. You haven’t addressed a point I have made in your last two comments. You seem to think that a YouTube video is some lowly source that doesn’t warrant merit. How sad then that you were proven wrong by a youtube video. YOU are the one who lacks any defense because you KNOW you were wrong, and by failing to address my points with facts you are proving that point.
“how sad” sure I’m at uni and you need a YouTube video to defend yourself because you don’t know the subject matter, andyou are trying to get my attention.
You have more important stuff to do than continuing this thread, might i suggest reading about the subject matter on Wikipedia?
Lmao you replied to me in the first place, exactly how am I trying to get your attention? I already had it from the beginning…
You gripe about the merits of a youtube video (which I only linked to because I’m not gonna spell the whole damn proof out for you here), and you tell me to go read wikipedia? I’m guessing you are just being sarcastic there, because if not… sheesh. Yikes. Oof, even.
Wikipedia is extremely good for mathematics, that’s one, two is that the “proof” is inherently flawed as it leads to a very trivial contradiction.
I could walk you through the proof to so you how it’s wrong, but you are obviously more concerned with proving to a university student that your high school level understanding of maths is better because you saw a YouTube video.
You should reflect on that.
Hahaha ok then show me how the proof is flawed? You will have a LOT of mathematicians and scientists extremely interested in your proof.
Also, I learned this stuff in high school, but I went to college a decade ago so… maybe when you get done with math 253 and get into some higher level courses that cover complex analysis, you will change your tune.
Wikipedia IS indeed great for mathematics, as is a youtube video from university professors who teach and apply these mathematics. Exactly what is wrong with a youtube video featuring high level math professors teaching concepts about mathematics? You just keep saying “durr your only defense is a youtube video” when it literally is not “my only defense” it is just a single source I used to prove you wrong. You never gave a rebuttal to my point, just tried to attack the source. You say you know about the video and the concept, but you still make false and baseless claims that I already proved wrong. You are simply butthurt that you were wrong.
deleted by creator