Post by: guest39538 on 12/09/2017 19:56:08
BUT............I think it is something to do with numbers, my primary number would be 1=∞, my logic is telling me that 1 can be really small or infinitely large. 1 can be any length from 0 to infinitely , so epsilon must be 1=∞.
Post by: Bored chemist on 12/09/2017 20:49:16
I have no real idea what I am discussing hereClearly.
Post by: guest39538 on 12/09/2017 20:55:40
Then it should be an interesting learning curve. According to definition on google search it is permitivity?I have no real idea what I am discussing hereClearly.
added - ok
Quote
permittivity
ˌpəːmɪˈtɪvɪti/Submit
nounPHYSICS
the ability of a substance to store electrical energy in an electric field.
I would of thought the electrostatic field was the energy (charge), rather than a substances ability to store electrical energy in an electric field. I believe that electrostatic fields are actually polarised magnetic fields , the field itself becoming ''ionised'' from the N-field. Even a Dielectric field has an electrostatic field.
So κ=ε0 and μ0 of free space.
and κ=ε1 and μ1 of substance
A zero point charge occupying 1 zero space
However I am quite sure that q1 ''wraps'' itself around q2 to form N. I am also thinking the HIgg's field is a dielectric field .
v=(N≠N)
p.s Just doodling some thoughts while I learn about epsilon.
Post by: evan_au on 13/09/2017 04:22:10
Mathematicians and Physicists use ε for various purposes (including permittivity in physics and electrical engineering).
- In reality, it can mean whatever you define it to mean
- But if your definition is internally inconsistent, don't expect anyone to pay attention to your definition
So please provide your definition, or a link to where you saw it used.
PS: 1 = ∞ is already a contradiction, so don't hold your breath waiting for the accolades
PPS: Please phrase the title as a question, as per the site guidelines to which you agreed when you signed up...
Post by: guest39538 on 13/09/2017 12:08:44
"Epsilon" is the Greek letter ε (lower case) or Ε (upper case), and it usually makes a short "e" soundI would of thought asking questions was for the main sections of the forum where of course I am excluded from posting in?
Mathematicians and Physicists use ε for various purposes (including permittivity in physics and electrical engineering).
- In reality, it can mean whatever you define it to mean
- But if your definition is internally inconsistent, don't expect anyone to pay attention to your definition
So please provide your definition, or a link to where you saw it used.
PS: 1 = ∞ is already a contradiction, so don't hold your breath waiting for the accolades
PPS: Please phrase the title as a question, as per the site guidelines to which you agreed when you signed up...
I do not believe I have in any way breached forum rules by not asking a question in the new theories section.
I suppose this theory would be 1=∞
So there is no question other than what was epsilon which you answered. I have to ask questions during my theories because of my exclusion.
Post by: guest39538 on 13/09/2017 22:49:13
Quote
1 = ∞ is already a contradiction
Quite provable it isn't a contradiction.
1mm
1cm
1inch
1yard
1 meter
1 mile
1 ly
How far can I extend 1? I believe it is infinitely. 0 and 1 are boundaries . 1 can be expanded infinitely from any 0 point of the Universe. So epsilon would be X=0→1∞
Boundary 0 and boundary 1∞ being directly proportional in length and relative to the most distance away observable visible light of each boundary.
epsilon.jpg (15.53 kB . 1015x625 - viewed 3715 times)ε=var(X)
Post by: evan_au on 14/09/2017 06:15:06
Quote from: tkadm30
Quite provable (1 = ∞) isn't a contradiction.This seems to be ignoring the fact that the units are just as important as the actual numbers.
1mm
1cm
1inch
1yard
1 meter
1 mile
1 ly
1 inch is not equal to 1 yard (different units of length)
In fact, 1 yard = 36 inches!
1 inch is definitely not equal to 1 kilogram (different units: length vs mass)
These cannot even be compared unless you refer to some conversion factor
For example, in the metric system, 1 cubic centimeter of water weighs 1 gram (at a particular temperature & pressure)
So the properties of water act as a conversion factor
This has not shown that 1 = ∞, even if you ignore the units.
So lets ignore the fact that values are different (not "="), and try to generalise:
- A finite amount of length in one units can be converted to a finite amount of length in different units*
- But this has not showed how a finite amount of length in one units can be converted into an infinite amount of length in different units.
So I am afraid that you haven't proven that "1 = ∞", and the contradiction still stands.
*Assuming that they are measured in the same frame inertial of reference.
- If they are in different frames of reference, some finite measure in length may appear to be a different finite length.
- Relativity does have some infinities, but we have not run into any real infinities yet, because our finite energy sources don't let us reach infinite energies.
Post by: guest39538 on 14/09/2017 09:04:59
I never put that 1 inch is equal to 1 yard, I am sorry but you have misunderstood . I was showing an increase in distance between 0 and 1, the units did not matter.Quote from: tkadm30Quite provable (1 = ∞) isn't a contradiction.This seems to be ignoring the fact that the units are just as important as the actual numbers.
1mm
1cm
1inch
1yard
1 meter
1 mile
1 ly
1 inch is not equal to 1 yard (different units of length)
In fact, 1 yard = 36 inches!
1 inch is definitely not equal to 1 kilogram (different units: length vs mass)
These cannot even be compared unless you refer to some conversion factor
For example, in the metric system, 1 cubic centimeter of water weighs 1 gram (at a particular temperature & pressure)
So the properties of water act as a conversion factor
This has not shown that 1 = ∞, even if you ignore the units.
So lets ignore the fact that values are different (not "="), and try to generalise:
- A finite amount of length in one units can be converted to a finite amount of length in different units*
- But this has not showed how a finite amount of length in one units can be converted into an infinite amount of length in different units.
So I am afraid that you haven't proven that "1 = ∞", and the contradiction still stands.
*Assuming that they are measured in the same frame inertial of reference.
- If they are in different frames of reference, some finite measure in length may appear to be a different finite length.
- Relativity does have some infinities, but we have not run into any real infinities yet, because our finite energy sources don't let us reach infinite energies.
0-1
0--1
0----1
0-----1
There is no reason that the above could not be expanded infinitely like our ever expanding visual universe.
So I am afraid that you haven't proven that "1 = ∞" is a contradiction.
x=∞↔∞
0→1=∞←0←→1→∞
For something to have boundaries of finite, it has to be within/borderline infinite.
p.s infinite is not a number, it means without end. I can expand 0→1 without an end. i.e infinite
Post by: guest4091 on 14/09/2017 19:06:24
Your fundamental mistake is, 'infinity' is not a number, but a condition or relation, 'without limit', i.e. it has no value.
Post by: guest39538 on 14/09/2017 19:43:21
Thebox;I know infinite is not a number but 1 is infinite.
Your fundamental mistake is, 'infinity' is not a number, but a condition or relation, 'without limit', i.e. it has no value.
Post by: evan_au on 14/09/2017 20:04:20
Quote from: TheBox
I know infinite is not a number but 1 is infinite.Sorry, but 1 is quite finite.
It is the smallest non-zero integer.
It has the condition of being finite, bounded (an integer between 0 and 2) and specific (1).
So 1 does not equal infinity.
Post by: guest39538 on 15/09/2017 10:53:33
No, we can expand 1 from zero infinitely.Quote from: TheBoxI know infinite is not a number but 1 is infinite.Sorry, but 1 is quite finite.
It is the smallest non-zero integer.
It has the condition of being finite, bounded (an integer between 0 and 2) and specific (1).
So 1 does not equal infinity.
Post by: guest4091 on 16/09/2017 18:01:38
You are only redefining a different unit.No, we can expand 1 from zero infinitely.Quote from: TheBoxI know infinite is not a number but 1 is infinite.Sorry, but 1 is quite finite.
It is the smallest non-zero integer.
It has the condition of being finite, bounded (an integer between 0 and 2) and specific (1).
So 1 does not equal infinity.
Post by: guest39538 on 17/09/2017 14:45:06
No I am not redefining a different unit, I am expanding 1 from 0 and the distance in my thoughts and mind that I can expand one is an infinite amount of distance from 0 in a continual expanse.You are only redefining a different unit.No, we can expand 1 from zero infinitely.Quote from: TheBoxI know infinite is not a number but 1 is infinite.Sorry, but 1 is quite finite.
It is the smallest non-zero integer.
It has the condition of being finite, bounded (an integer between 0 and 2) and specific (1).
So 1 does not equal infinity.
It would be everlasting in expanding, so therefore 1=∞
Post by: Bored chemist on 17/09/2017 16:11:56
I am expanding 1 from 0 and the distance in my thoughts and mind
You are failing to convey it to any other mind.
Post by: guest39538 on 17/09/2017 16:21:48
Your mind is failing to comprehend it more like.I am expanding 1 from 0 and the distance in my thoughts and mind
You are failing to convey it to any other mind.
Which 1 in the below is in the correct position?
0.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1......................................
The answer is, they all are.
How far can I extend the above?
The answer is , infinitely.
Understand that looking between the distance stars is
Post by: jeffreyH on 17/09/2017 16:27:12
Post by: guest39538 on 17/09/2017 16:30:38
One or unity is a whole thing.
One infinity whole,
Post by: guest39538 on 17/09/2017 16:32:32
t=∞?
Δt=∞v
added-
=∞t
=∞t
=∞tc would be relatively not moving. huh?
p.s it does not matter how fast you travel you never reach the end.
added- I have ''battered'' my own head with this one, if something takes an infinite time to get ''somewhere'' then relatively its velocity is 0. This makes no sense but seems logically correct.
added- Relative to an infinite Universe nothing is moving. hmmmmmmm?????
Forgive the punt but ''holy crap''. Relative to an infinite Universe we do not have any dimension or exist but occupy the same space as one bit of data in a 0 point source, 0 point space. Our entire visual Universe would be relatively a zero point energy.
Hmmmm???
Post by: guest4091 on 19/09/2017 15:58:16
if something takes an infinite time to get ''somewhere'' then relatively its velocity is 0.It never gets there!
You state infinity is not a number, then contradict yourself by using it in a math expression. Human society has no experience with anything infinite, so a definition is feeble at best.
You can't measure a stick that only has one end!
Post by: guest39538 on 19/09/2017 18:51:37
Please explain, I don't seem to 'see' my own contradiction? Can you please point it out to me?if something takes an infinite time to get ''somewhere'' then relatively its velocity is 0.It never gets there!
You state infinity is not a number, then contradict yourself by using it in a math expression. Human society has no experience with anything infinite, so a definition is feeble at best.
You can't measure a stick that only has one end!
Post by: guest4091 on 21/09/2017 16:09:03
You posted 1=∞.
Infinity is not a number, and not even a noun. You are comparing apples and oranges. The statement 'he tossed the stone across the street' makes sense. The statement 'he tossed the beautiful across the street' makes no sense.
Post by: guest39538 on 21/09/2017 21:25:47
Thebox;There is no contradiction and it does not state the infinite is a number, it states the number 1 can be infinitely large.
You posted 1=∞.
Infinity is not a number, and not even a noun. You are comparing apples and oranges. The statement 'he tossed the stone across the street' makes sense. The statement 'he tossed the beautiful across the street' makes no sense.
Perhaps if you answered the very simple question I asked you would have the same answer.
How far can 1 be extended from 0?
Post by: Bored chemist on 21/09/2017 21:31:58
How far can 1 be extended from 0?Your question makes no sense.
OK now you have an answer ( the only sensible one, btw).
Post by: guest39538 on 22/09/2017 00:04:34
My question is in English and a very simple question to answer. Let me try it another way, we are going to define a length of space and start at 0. We will end at 1 to set a boundary.How far can 1 be extended from 0?Your question makes no sense.
OK now you have an answer ( the only sensible one, btw).
What is the maximum possible boundary length?