If there are an infinite number of whole numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two whole numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two fractions, does that mean that there are infinite infinities? And an infinite number of those infinities? And an infinite number of those infinities? And an infinite number of those infinities? And an infinite number of those infinities? And…(infinitely times. And that infinitely times. And that infinitely times. And that infinitely times. And that infinitely times. And…)…continues forever. And that continues forever. And that continues forever. And that continues forever. And…(…)…Our entire system of quantification is based on a paradox.
>>23824403Some people would argue that math is subjective. Like numbers aren't real. They're just in your head.
>>23824449Some people are retarded.
>>23824403you know we have a science board right?
>>23824449Right. Just like English is used to describe things, so is maths. They're not the thing being described, but rather a form or model for communication. Once you recognise that, their failings and imperfections are no longer so significant.
>>23824403There are two orders of infinity: countable and uncountable. Uncountable infinities are infinitely bigger than countable infinities.Whole numbers are countable, because they're in a specific order. Every infant learns how to count them.Decimal numbers are not countable. You can't arrange them in order, because there isn't even a "smallest" decimal number. It's not 0.1, or 0.01, or even 0.00001. So there are infinitely more decimal numbers than whole numbers.>>23824449This anon is right b.t.w. Mathematics is a human construct, founded on a set of assumptions.
Stop posting this crap. This isn't even vaguely a /lit/ topic.
