/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9853620
>why do people in power don't want to give up their place
lmao

>>9853620
lay out his argument right now in as few paragraphs that is required. telling me "go watch the videos" isn't gonna cut it, MAKE the argument right now that convinces me I should throw out all the proofs and intuition that tell me irrational numbers exist just as much as any other set of numbers exist.

>>9853620
He thinks that there is a largest natural number. It's honestly amazing that people take him as seriously as they do.

How can he get away with completely ignoring intuitionism school of mathematics and constructive math? Like how can he not even mention Brouwer, Heyting, type theorists (most notably Martin Loef).

I mean he could state that he had worked through their works and then show his vision.

Instead, he makes it look as if he is doing something important but doesn't even bother to look at what other people have done in this direction.

Ultrafinitism has its place. Numbers that are literally can't be computed but are still natural are hardly worth our consideration.

>>9853620
He is a hero because at least he does not try to practice medicine, fly airplanes, or fight fires, and cause people to get killed by his incompetence.

>>9853620
He's very popular... among the naive students his polemics are meant to attract.

reminder that any number beyond 1 does not exist

>>9853905
Every number is derived from 1

>>9853905
0

>>9853908
0 is just 1 minus itself

>>9853906
>Every number is derived from 1
not true, by the way

>>9853910
>minus

Um. Did you define that operator?

>>9853911
Find me a number that isn't divisible by 1

>>9853620
It is maybe too clear that he gave up on mathematics a while ago, and now he just attempts to monetarize series of youtube videos that promote extreme anti-intellectual and anti-scientific ideas, which he perceives to be popular among people who never finished a proper education.
He could become the new Bill Gates.

>>9853620
Because his ideas are fucking retarded.

>>9853816
Mathematics should be constrained by the natural world or rather the universe as it is a tool we, human beings, developed by interacting with it.
Even if you count every single atom or sub particle of the entire universe and add them you would still get a finite number.
Set theory is mixing theology and philosophy into mathematics.

>>9855734
Cosmologists will be excited to learn how you discovered that the universe is finite, so give them a call.

>>9855734
That's only true if you're counting in a specific way. Here's another way to count:
Count every particle in the universe - 1.
Assign this value to the last particle.
This is possible because there are only a finite number of particles in the universe.
Now, starting with this new number, count all the particles again.
This can be repeated arbitrarily, or until the heat death of the universe.

But then say that you sit in an extreme gravitational potential, the number of particles seen there will be different than a different frame that moves faster relative to the first.

Because of this, two societies using wildburger math will have different kinds of math. Pretty shitty considering the only limitation is an arbitrary argument that has no consideration of the real physical world.

>>9855734
Sounds like somebody is having a religious issue with arithmetic. Just staying away from math might help with that.

>>9855777
Digits confirm
He's too autistic to understand reification and his creativity suffers for it

>>9853620
>If Plato, Eratosthenes, Thales were alive today they would more likely than not be on his side.
At least in the case of Plato, this is very wrong. I'm not familiar with Thales' views infinity.

>>9853865
>Ultrafinitism
You don't get what this means. It means that they think the numbers literally don't exist mathematically.

>>9853620
>Why does the mathematical establishment behave like a religious institution and does not want to engage in a battlesphere of ideas?
bad for their egos
would lead to uncomfortable cognitive dissonance for them
would be disruptive to their status quo of denialism

>>9856277
Theres just as much fame to be gained disproving something as there is proving.

Scientists will tear your shit up if they get the chance. Academia is the most toxic battlesphere I've seen.

When a 4 year old can debunk your claims, it's not worth further discussion. Wildberger only appears on this shit board.

>>9856454
>When a 4 year old can debunk your claims
who has claims like that?

>>9855777
>religious issue with arithmetic
With Set Theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U75S_ZvnWNk

>>9855754
>discovered that the universe is finite
lmao what?
Until such a time that the BBT is dumped, the universe is understood to be finite.

>>9856786
>Until such a time that the BBT is dumped, the universe is understood to be finite.
Wow! Another amazing cosmological breakthrough! Please tell me more.

>>9856786
What's outside the edge of the visible universe then, dummy?

>>9855734
this is objectively wrong, because quantum mechanics contains infinities of possibilities in scenarios like with object paths

>>9856786
>thinks the BBT necessitates a finite universe
You fucking tard, a net 0 energy for the universe means that it can be easily infinite and not violate anything

>>9856892
There is no edge, universe is a "4d sphere"

>>9856979
>implying negative global curvature
no proof

>>9856778
Wilburger's insistence on only using natural numbers obviously.

>>9856892
>>9856979
they usually call that the "surface of last scattering"

>>9853620
He doesn't argue for anything you could prove right or wrong.
He just has an autistic preference to not use the reals and/or infinity in general.

>>9855734
You're assuming man isn't part of nature which is fucking retarded.

>>9855734
>Mathematics should be constrained by the natural world or rather the universe as it is a tool we, human beings, developed by interacting with it.
>should
Can you explain why?

>>9855734
>Mathematics should be constrained by the natural world
We have something constrained by the natural world already, it's called empirical science.
No numbers exist in the natural world. Not even integers. If you think they do it's because you're confusing something like '5 fingers' or a printed symbol representing 5 with the number 5 itself.
There isn't even a very solid rationale for claiming alleged natural world objects ought to be divided out the way most of us do. You can read about mereological nihilism for example which is a school of thought arguing any alleged objects that can be broken down into parts don't really exist e.g. A dog has a head, a torso, a tail, legs, etc., and a dog torso has fur, internal organs, etc., and a dog torso's internal organs have tissue, blood, bile, etc.
There are some guesses for the smallest instance of material in the universe that maybe don't have parts, but we don't really know for sure whether there's further subdivision we can figure out or if maybe even at some newly discerned smallest scale of reality we end up with a continuum. And if the latter happens then there's reason to argue the reals have more 'natural' merit to them than the integers.

>>9856786
>BBT leads to a spatially finite universe

>>9856807
Don't bully.

>>9855761
maths has nothing to do with reality, especially maths based onsets

>>9855794
>numbers literally don't exist mathematically
LMAO at that word salad. Lay off the crazy pills, senpai. Srs i'm worried about you desu.

>>9853620
>Why isn't he more popular?
Because the current foundations work well enough.

>Why does the mathematical establishment behave like a religious institution and does not want to engage in a battlesphere of ideas?
Firstly, that is wrong.
Secondly, debating someone is a very time consuming process, as you have to do a lot of research.

>If Plato, Eratosthenes, Thales were alive today they would more likely than not be on his side.
This means nothing.

>>9853620
>number systems changed in the past
True
>the way we do maths has changed in the past
True
>let me show you another way that i believe is better, where everything can be reduced to first principles instead of relying on "just take my word for it"
/sci/ loses their minds

He's great, and I have no idea how some bullshit like Common Core got implemented while his stuff doesn't.