0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Quote from: Thebox on 06/11/2017 21:27:39Yes it doesThen one shoe is the same as two shoes. You can't have it both ways.Quoteyou are thinking objects and names of quantities. You are not thinking about the relationship of numbers and the universe.They're the same thing. If they are not, then you are saying that sometimes 1 does not equal 1 while at the same time saying that 1 somehow equals 2.QuoteLook at this sequence. 0-1-2-3Then look at the below sequence 0-----1In the above sequence 1 and 2 are fractions of 3 but the below sequence is equal to the top sequence but without the fractions . 1 marks a boundary the same as 3 marks marks the same boundary. 1=3 Non-sequitur.QuoteI understand this is new to you so don't expect you to understand it right a way.Because it's wrong.Quote1/3=0.333333 of 13=1 ok?No, not okay. It's wrong. If scientists used your "math" to try to calculate how much fuel and oxidizer would be necessary to put into a given rocket design, do you think the rocket would work? I should say not. If your math cannot be used in a calculation, then it's useless and pointless.

Yes it does

you are thinking objects and names of quantities. You are not thinking about the relationship of numbers and the universe.

Look at this sequence. 0-1-2-3Then look at the below sequence 0-----1In the above sequence 1 and 2 are fractions of 3 but the below sequence is equal to the top sequence but without the fractions . 1 marks a boundary the same as 3 marks marks the same boundary. 1=3

I understand this is new to you so don't expect you to understand it right a way.

1/3=0.333333 of 13=1 ok?

No you just don't understand, it is not wrong in the context I am using it, measuring the nothing of space. Try to understand that an amount of nothings add up to something in the form of spacial volume. You are really struggling to imagine a 0 point aren't you?

Quote from: Thebox on 06/11/2017 23:31:52No you just don't understand, it is not wrong in the context I am using it, measuring the nothing of space. Try to understand that an amount of nothings add up to something in the form of spacial volume. You are really struggling to imagine a 0 point aren't you? I have no trouble with it. A point, by definition, is zero-dimensional. It has no spacial volume. It has no size.

No a point is 2 dimensional and has a size, a 0 point has no size and is 0 dimensional

This dot may have a diameter of, say, 0.2mm, but a point has no size. No matter how far you zoomed in, it would still have no width. Since a point is a place, not a thing, it has no dimensions.

unless we expand it by using 0³.

Adding xyz into the frame giving a volume of 1.

If you "expand" a point then it is no longer a point.

1 what? 1 liter? 1 cubic millimeter? Volume is always expressed in units.

Ok I got what you saying about a point and a dot, I consider a point is the center of a dot . Imagine a hoop surrounding a point , except the hoop is a sphere . So your dot I want as a sphere,

1 length of nothing (space)

Length? I thought you said volume? Anyway, since when is "nothing" a unit of measurement? How would I convert one of your "nothings" into an existing measure of length, like a millimeter? What conversion ratio would I use to do the calculation?

So you're talking about a tiny sphere, not a point?

I would have to measure it first then do the conversion, I need super flat surfaces and a couple of lasers, and would need to make a jig also to precise specifications.

A tiny sphere or cube for ease around a point.

How do you measure the size of a "nothing"? What is it that the lasers are measuring?

Quote from: Kryptid on 07/11/2017 20:06:14How do you measure the size of a "nothing"? What is it that the lasers are measuring?Hoe do you measure nothing? You put nothing next to nothing to make something, i.e a length.

The lasers are just for positioning two beams that are parallel 1 mm apart. The inner edge of each beam the start and finish position.

Which would depend entirely upon how closely you decide to put those "nothings" next to each other (if such a concept of putting nothing next to nothing even makes sense).

Imagine it this way, overlaying dots so the points are next to each other. Each dot will be offset by 1 point to the left or to the right.

Question. How large is an infinite number of infinitesimals?

To go back a few posts.1 is a boundary. 2 is a bigger boundary. So 1 cannot be infinite because we can define and operate on something bigger according to the normal rules of arithmetic.Measurement involves a number (1, 2, 48.935....) and a quantity (inch, year, moron..). Measuring is the comparison of the numbers associated with two objects having the same quantity.