[Bored chemist]

I noticed a pattern in the numbers.

0<≈<1∞<2<∞<3<∞<4<∞<5<∞<6<∞<7<∞<8<∞<9.....

It's not a real pattern.
You made it up, and it's gibberish.

[andreasva (OP)]

    0<∞<1 is a mathematical truth.

No.
It is not.

Once again, you are wrong.  There is an infinite number of values between 0 and 1.  Our base 10 numbering system creates a logic loop, nothing more.  We invented numbers. 

or you are wrong.
Which of those possibilities is more likely?
Do you really think you are cleverer than everyone else who has considered this  topic before?

The fact that's it's a possibility at all proves me right.

Do you think you're more clever than anyone else is the real question...

I'm just an average guy who refuses to believe much of anything until I understand it on my own terms. 

The fact is, you lost this debate, and now you're just being a troll, by definition.   

Unless of course, you can prove 0<∞<1 is mathematically false. 

[andreasva (OP)]

    I noticed a pattern in the numbers.

    0<≈<1∞<2<∞<3<∞<4<∞<5<∞<6<∞<7<∞<8<∞<9.....

It's not a real pattern.

Once again, you are wrong.  It's a logic loop.  Count all the fractions between 0 and 1, and get back to me when you're finished.

[Bored chemist]

I already explained the mistake you are making there

No.

There are an infinite number of values between 0 and 1.
That is not the same as saying that infinity is in that range.
It is clearly bigger.

Do you not understand it?

[Bored chemist]

Count all the fractions between 0 and 1, and get back to me when you're finished.

OK,
Counting things is a matter of putting them in a 1 to 1 correspondence with the integers and seeing how far you get.

And there's a method for ordering the fractions between 0 and 1
so they can be counted.
This explains it
https://www.askamathematician.com/2011/03/q-how-do-you-talk-about-the-size-of-infinity-how-can-one-infinity-be-bigger-than-another/

There are a much bigger number of numbers between 0 and 1 than there are integers between 0 and infinity.
Not all infinite sets are countable, but the fractions are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number

[andreasva (OP)]

We created a logic loop in our base 10 numbering system, which yes, unbelievably, we didn't notice.  The universe doesn't care about our numbering system.  As I said, we could repeat 10 letters of the alphabet with a different grunt between each cycle, and it would logically be the same equivalent of counting.  Math is about reducing variables.  We added an infinite number of variables when we created our base 10 numbering system.  It made it easier for us to count logically, rather than using fractions of the whole.  You know, a piece of pie, rather than a .125 slice of pie from the whole.  The latter being a mouthful.

You know this is mathematically correct.  It's a fact, not fiction.

0<∞<1
   
You may not like it, but it is a mathematical truth.  There exist an infinite number of decimals between 0 and 1.  To make things easier, we shifted the decimal place to the right and created a set of integers called our base 10 numbering system.   We zoomed in on the fractions. 

The universe is either 0, or Ι1Ι, in terms of finite values.  We are everything else in between 0 and Ι1Ι, because we are a fraction of the whole.  The whole being greater than its parts. 

The universe is infinite.

[Bored chemist]

We created a logic loop in our base 10 numbering system

No we didn't.

You know this is mathematically correct.  It's a fact, not fiction.

0<∞<1

Well, it's not fact.
It's just nonsense.

[andreasva (OP)]

Well, it's not fact.
It's just nonsense.

Says you.

Like I said, when you get done counting the decimals between 0 and 1, get back with me.

0<∞<1 is mathematically and logically true

We created a repeating logic loop. 

[Kryptid]

You know this is mathematically correct.  It's a fact, not fiction.

0<∞<1

Have you tried pushing this on a mathematics forum? Or sending it to mathematicians? If what you have is really a proof, then those well-versed in theorems and the like should be pretty easy to convince.

[Bored chemist]

Like I said, when you get done counting the decimals between 0 and 1, get back with me.

I did.
Unfortunately, you didn't understand it.

We created a repeating logic loop. 

No
You have created a loop on non-logic.
You keep on making the same laughable statement, even though I have explained why it's wrong.
And then you just say it again.

[Bored chemist]

Says you.

Well, says me and others here.
Whereas you are the only one on your side.
You might want to think about that.

[andreasva (OP)]

Well, says me and others here.
Whereas you are the only one on your side.
You might want to think about that.

If the number of people had any relevance to something being right or wrong, we'd all be in church today.

The fact remains:

0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

Like I said, when you get finished counting the finite numbers that lie between 0 and 1, get back with me.

[Bored chemist]

The fact remains:

0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

It's logically valid.
But it is plainly wrong.

Like I said, when you get finished counting the finite numbers that lie between 0 and 1, get back with me.

Actually, that's not the question you asked me earlier.
You asked about the fractions.
The fact that you don't recognise the difference shows that you don't understand  the maths of infinite numbers.

[andreasva (OP)]

    The fact remains:

    0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

It's logically valid.

Exactly.

Infinity is not a number, and can only be understood logically. 

Infinity is analog, not digital. 

Actually, that's not the question you asked me earlier.
You asked about the fractions.
The fact that you don't recognise the difference shows that you don't understand  the maths of infinite numbers.

The math of infinite numbers is a logical definition for values that are too great to be expressed individually in a finite manner, because it would take an infinite amount of time to do so. 

Logic had to be used to define infinite sets. 

[Bored chemist]

    The fact remains:

    0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

It's logically valid.

Exactly.

Infinity is not a number, and can only be understood logically. 

Infinity is analog, not digital. 

You didn't understand.
It's only "a valid logical expression in mathematics" in the same way that
2+2=5 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 
It's logically valid- the syntax works just fine.

But it's stupidly wrong.

Infinity is analog, not digital. 

That's word salad.

[andreasva (OP)]

It's only "a valid logical expression in mathematics" in the same way that
2+2=5 is a valid logical expression in mathematics.
It's logically valid- the syntax works just fine.

No, 2+2=5 is an invalid logical expression in mathematics.

0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics.

It's perfectly fine to show that there is an infinite number of decimals places between 0 and 1 in this manner.

You just don't like it. 

[Bored chemist]

No
There are an infinite number of fractions between 0 and 1
That is (still) not the same as saying that infinity is between 0 and 1.
You really need to understand that so you can make progress.

[andreasva (OP)]

That is (still) not the same as saying that infinity is between 0 and 1.
You really need to understand that so you can make progress.

What I understand is that our inability to count infinitely doesn't in any way mean anything to the universe.  The universe couldn't care less about 2, or 3, or any concept of an infinite number as concocted by us.  The universe is simple.

Man creates the complexity.

Like I said, we could repeat 10 letters of the alphabet with a different grunt between cycles, and that is the logical equivalent of counting.  Our inability to count indefinitely due to time doesn't mean anything to the universe, and most certainly doesn't help us understand it. 

 

[Bored chemist]

Like I said, we could repeat 10 letters of the alphabet with a different grunt between cycles,

What do you think you mean by "cycles" here?
It doesn't make sense.

Our inability to count indefinitely due to time doesn't mean anything to the universe, and most certainly doesn't help us understand it. 

Nobody said it did.

[Bored chemist]

The universe could care less about 2,

The universe doesn't care about anything (and, btw, the phrase is "couldn't care less"- think about it).
However, in this universe, we have, for example, planets in reasonably stable orbits.
That doesn't work unless the force of gravity falls with distance in inverse proportion to that distance raised to the power 2.
No other number works.
So, the universe is somewhere where 2 is really important.

Facts like that get in the way of your absurd idea that only 1 matters.