Burden of proof lies on the positive claim and all that junk?Originally Posted by qwertysaur
Burden of proof lies on the positive claim and all that junk?
SHow me a couple examples of how to disprove somethings false, we can give it a try.
And isn't all the evidence that points to it being true disproving it's false? Isn't that, by definition, HOW you disprove something is false, by showing how it is true?
If something is false, that doesn't make its opposite necessarily true.
In this case though, it kind of does? Does it or does it not equal 1? If No is false, Yes is the only logical answer. Though yes, in most situations, I agree with Tav.
But that also means in this situation, proving it true will prove the opposite false, simply because there are only two viable options for answers, yes or no. And either one or the other is true.
And if all the evidence points to yes being true, no is false. Unless someone can explain how it can be both equal to, and not equal to 1 at the same time.
shut up, that's why.
watch out for converse error!
P -> Q
~Q -> ~P
Q -/> P
~P -/> ~Q
Math has some slight changes to certain definitions. True means "never false", not the opposite of false.
The simplest method to disprove is through indirect proofs, where you force a contradiction. But that is only usefull to disprove truth, because you only have to do that once to finish.
However usually you want to disprove that something is true, wher you have to do it once and be done with it. Disproving it is false is exponentially harder, as you need to check every case imaginable and make sure that no slight variation in the execution of the theory will result in a false result or a contradiction in what is aready known. It is really tedious and annoying to do, but it is possible to disprove something is false. Another method is an implicit proof where you prove it for any number n and then n + 1, then test for any exclisions that would create a bad result to exclude.
In short, there is no way to actually disprovce 0.999 = 1 is false. There is a good reason you get to name a discovery after yourself, the math community is very picky in accepting new ideas and tests the life out of it to try and break it.
From what I'm gathering, you only need to disprove it's false if it's going to have some form of application or another, just in case there is a single situation out there it won't be true. This is a process that is likely used just to be on the safe side.
IN short, if you can't disprove something to be false, it hardly means it isn't true. It just means the community wont' risk using on the off chance it's wrong.
Given the impractical use of .999... and the fact I see no way it could ever come up, having to disprove its false is an entirely pointless excersize, regardless of if it was possible or not.
Either that, or the Idea of disproving falseness has nothing to do with eliminating risks, and all mathemticians are just Elitists assholes. And if thats the case, it still has no real relevance to this conversation.
If there was an omnipotent being similar to 'God' who looked at infinity, what would it see?
Kefka's coming, look intimidating!
Have a nice day!!
It's a cosmetic adjustment. Apparently, a single digit is too bland for the likes of hardcore mathematicians, and thus we have to use bigger numbers and involve concepts into our work.
Mathematicians are elitist assholes because their work is the purest (that is, unfettered by a need of knowledge in any other discipline). It takes a certain personality to stomach higher level math. After the necessary knowledge that we need to prove .9... == 1, math starts to involve far fewer numbers, and more involved concepts.
It really has less to do with covering your ass than you're thinking.
take a discrete math course!
On the note of math..
YouTube - I Will Derive!
Um, yeah? So? But when the amount of nines after the decimal is infinite, it equals 1. This is a fact. It's not opinion or debate, it's been proven.
.999... is not the same number as 1 if you use the two in application the diffrence in the answers youd get would be so miniscule you wouldent even be able to see it so you would apear to have the same answer. but there is a space between 1 and .999.. its just infinitly small. so in a practical and mathmatical sense they are the same number but if you wanna get down to the nity gritty technicaly no they are not the same number
No, they are the same number. The difference is not infinitely small; it's non existent.
If you can find me a number between .9... and 1, then I'll admit that they have a difference. But since you can't, because you can't reach the end of .9..., then they are the same number. There is no difference; it is neither a practical nor technical difference. It is identity.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
