(Posted as Celtic19)
Posts: 256/410 (11Feb2008 at 05:54) 
2+2 is actually a good example because it all depends on which reference system we use. We humans happens to be born with 10 fingers and toes and thus use base 10 as our reference system.
Lets say a group of Marsians happen to have 3 fingers, they would surely use base 3 as their reference system and get 2+2=10 so you can say that 2 apples plus 2 apples equals 4 apples and always be right, but you cant say that 2+2=4 and always be correct. 2 and 4 is nothing but a symbol for something and such stuff can always change depending of who speaks (in one reference system it is correct but not in another) Thats just changing our perception of 2 and 10. Not the actual quantities they represent. For example if i counted 2 fingers on my hand and our little green man counted two fingers on his hand then we both counted two fingers. If we count two fingers on our other hand (and assuming our other friend doesnt have more then two hands) then we both counted 4. Not 10. Last edited by Celtic19, 11Feb2008 at 05:56. 


Posts: 899/1035
(11Feb2008 at 06:06) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
Thats just changing our perception of 2 and 10. Not the actual quantities they represent.
For example if i counted 2 fingers on my hand and our little green man counted two fingers on his hand then we both counted two fingers. If we count two fingers on our other hand (and assuming our other friend doesnt have more then two hands) then we both counted 4. Not 10. And I wasnt talking about the quantatities just our definition of the quantaties. Last edited by Pollock, 11Feb2008 at 06:09. 


Posts: 2020/2670
(11Feb2008 at 06:09) 
The definition of 2, is and always will be 2, or 1+1, or 31, ect, its always the same.
This is different than saying the definition of the worlds shape, because, way back, it was widely believed it was flat, now we know its round, the definition has literally changed, whereas the definition of 2, has never changed, nor will it ever change... "What about it?" "Oh nothing, it’s cute. We have five." "Ththousand." "Yes five thousand." "Don’t question it." 


(Posted as Celtic19)
Posts: 257/410 (11Feb2008 at 06:11) 
Isnt this what we are talking about our perception of something.Just because the medieval people percieved the world as flat it doesnt mean the world was flat. Just because we see a blue skye it doesnt mean the sky is blue.
And I wasnt talking about the quantatities just our definition of the quantaties. However if i still add kablonky and kablonky I am still going to get gaga. I am asking the mods not to warn me on this as these are just terms i made up to make my point. That 2+2 = 4 We are talking about perception but we are also trying to prove that some things aren't base on perception and are actual fact. 


Posts: 900/1035
(11Feb2008 at 06:41) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
True. I could call two "kablonky" and four "gaga".
However if i still add kablonky and kablonky I am still going to get gaga. I am asking the mods not to warn me on this as these are just terms i made up to make my point. That 2+2 = 4 We are talking about perception but we are also trying to prove that some things aren't base on perception and are actual fact. If something is proved today it doesnt mean it will still be true tomorrow as was the case with the world being flat, sky being blue and so on. 


(Posted as Celtic19)
Posts: 258/410 (11Feb2008 at 06:46) 
Ok agree there if I pick 2 apples and add 2 pears I will always get 4 things. Some mathematical stuff isnt worth disputing, just that the marsian might call 4 5 and still be just as right.But yes the quantaty is still 4 things.
If something is proved today it doesnt mean it will still be true tomorrow as was the case with the world being flat, sky being blue and so on. This is maths, which has been, is and always will be correct. 


Posts: 901/1035
(11Feb2008 at 07:14) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
yes it will. You just admitted that 2 apples and 2 mars rocks will always be 4 things.
This is maths, which has been, is and always will be correct. For 1000 years ago we thought the relation between the circumference and the diameter of a circle was a finite number with a certain amount of decimals now we know its not. 


Posts: 2022/2670
(11Feb2008 at 08:42) 
Just because someone incorrectly theorized of what pi was doesnt mean that mathematics is wrong, it simply means someone made a error in a calculation. The rproblem obviousl resolved itself, which is why math IS perfect, it checks itself....
Ill add this too "The first theoretical calculation seems to have been carried out by Archimedes of Syracuse (287212 BC). He obtained the approximation 223/71 < π < 22/7. Before giving an indication of his proof, notice that very considerable sophistication involved in the use of inequalities here. Archimedes knew, what so many people to this day do not, that π does not equal 22/7, and made no claim to have discovered the exact value. If we take his best estimate as the average of his two bounds we obtain 3.1418, an error of about 0.0002. " So what you said was a complete lie, in a attempt to prove your point, nice try tho "What about it?" "Oh nothing, it’s cute. We have five." "Ththousand." "Yes five thousand." "Don’t question it." Last edited by Chillin, 11Feb2008 at 08:51. 


Posts: 902/1035
(11Feb2008 at 12:56) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
Just because someone incorrectly theorized of what pi was doesnt mean that mathematics is wrong, it simply means someone made a error in a calculation. The rproblem obviousl resolved itself, which is why math IS perfect, it checks itself....
Ill add this too "The first theoretical calculation seems to have been carried out by Archimedes of Syracuse (287212 BC). He obtained the approximation 223/71 < π < 22/7. Before giving an indication of his proof, notice that very considerable sophistication involved in the use of inequalities here. Archimedes knew, what so many people to this day do not, that π does not equal 22/7, and made no claim to have discovered the exact value. If we take his best estimate as the average of his two bounds we obtain 3.1418, an error of about 0.0002. " So what you said was a complete lie, in a attempt to prove your point, nice try tho You try to use 3 as a value for pi or 3.1415 and youll get a huge error in the first calculation. I actually know some maths and im just saying that maths isnt 100% true either because there are things we dont know yet. And even if something is solved its just for one case. yes we have 1 apple but is it a big,little,grey, purple, heavy, or whatever sort of apple ? theres an infinite number of things that can be represented as 1 apple and sure it is still the quantity 1 but does this mean it is all the same ?. The number 2 is mathematically 1+1 or 31 but to how many digits do you calculate is the integer 2 (in any calculation a number from 1.51 to 2.49 can be representated as the integer 1 (for lack of space I dont add more decimals)) less of a two than 2.0000 is 1 apple less of an apple because I have eaten a bit of it compared to me having a whole apple. In short a quantitiy is not only black or white, it doesnt only exist or doesnt,theres an infinite number of grey areas. Theres also the issue of in which way does it exist. Last edited by Pollock, 11Feb2008 at 13:03. 


Posts: 228/294
(11Feb2008 at 16:01) 
2+2 is a bad place to start from especially if we are agreeing that we can't add value to the two. Like an apple has more value than an orange so its 1.3 of fruit while my orange is only 1 fruit.
If we can't do that its gonna be impossible. We should start from the math behind extra dimentions. Like demtion 12 so we could prove it wrong. 2 + 2 = 4 We couldn't even say We each got two pennies each but my penny was special and worth 2 sense and my other penny was worth one and your pennies were worth only 2 sense. 2 + 2 = 5 in this sense 2 pennies plus 2 pennies equalls 5 sense. Since we agree we can't do it like that... it does seem rather impossible. 


Posts: 2026/2670
(11Feb2008 at 19:17) 
Quote:
yes we have 1 apple but is it a big,little,grey, purple, heavy, or whatever sort of apple ?
Quote:
The number 2 is mathematically 1+1 or 31 but to how many digits do you calculate is the integer 2 (in any calculation a number from 1.51 to 2.49 can be representated as the integer 1 (for lack of space I dont add more decimals)) less of a two than 2.0000 is 1 apple less of an apple because I have eaten a bit of it compared to me having a whole apple.
Quote:
You try to use 3 as a value for pi or 3.1415 and youll get a huge error in the first calculation.
Quote:
That pi is an irrational number was proved 1761.
I can use wikipedia too, sure does state that that was prooven in 1761, by Johann Heinrich Lambert. But  I think Archimedes classifying pi as "223/71 < π < 22/7", more or less classifies it as irrational, if it could have been expressed as a fraction, he would have done so. Instead he essentially said, its bigger than this, and smaller than that, but I don't know EXACTLY what it is. This obviously happened in his lifetime (287212 BC) which occurred about 2000 years before Johann Heinrich Lambert got around to "prooving" it. Anyways enough of this, none of you have, or will be able to prove that math has, or ever will be wrong. Pollock attempted once at flat out lying to try to say math was once wrong by saying that we originally thought pi was a rational number, but as you can see, things like that never can happen (even 2000 years ago  mathematics never changes), because when you "do the math" it simply does not "add up" and you know you are wrong. That is how math proves itself, and that is why math is the only perfect science. No other field of science checks itself in this way. Lastly, to appease Ninjoo
Quote:
We each got two pennies each but my penny was special and worth 2 sense and my other penny was worth one and your pennies were worth only 2 sense.
2 + 2 = 5 in this sense 2 pennies plus 2 pennies equalls 5 sense. Since we agree we can't do it like that... it does seem rather impossible. You have 2 pennies, penny "A" and penny "B". Penny A is special and worth 2 cents. Penny B is a regular penny worth only 1 cent. I also have two pennies, penny "C" and penny "D". Both Penny C and Penny D are regular ones worth only 1 cent apiece. Using this NEW ALTERED value system you can say... A + B > C+ D Or the worth (using the new value system) of your pennies is greater than the worth of my pennies. Just realize, when we get back to the real world and have to use the real value system for pennies (all pennies are worth one cent) and we go to spend them, our pennies have the same value again, or A + B = C + D Tada, math wins again. All your really doing is changing one of the variables by saying one of the pennies is worth 2, instead of 1. "What about it?" "Oh nothing, it’s cute. We have five." "Ththousand." "Yes five thousand." "Don’t question it." 


Posts: 903/1035
(11Feb2008 at 20:05) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
Quote:
You seem to be grasping at straws now, the number 2 is a real, rational, integer. Yes, the real numbers 1.51 through 2.49 can be ROUNDED to the integer 2. That does not mean they are EQUAL TO 2. And if you eat part of a apple you dont have a whole apple anymore do you? Tell you what, weigh the apple before you eat part of it, then weigh it after your done, give me those two figures and I can tell you EXACTLY (depending on how precise of a scale were using) how much of the apple you have eaten using math. And I would be 100% right too (based on the the figures given to me from the scale). I will NEVER be even the SLIGHTEST bit off, under ANY circumstances.
Quote:
Archimedes used 3.1418 and he was semi close, thats farther off than the example you gave at 3.1415..., I guess it all depends on what you classify as a "huge error"
Quote:
First off to anyone who might not know a irrational number is essentially a real number that cannot be expressed as a fraction, "pi" and "the square root of 2" are good examples of this.
I can use wikipedia too, sure does state that that was prooven in 1761, by Johann Heinrich Lambert. But  I think Archimedes classifying pi as "223/71 < π < 22/7", more or less classifies it as irrational, if it could have been expressed as a fraction, he would have done so. Instead he essentially said, its bigger than this, and smaller than that, but I don't know EXACTLY what it is. This obviously happened in his lifetime (287212 BC) which occurred about 2000 years before Johann Heinrich Lambert got around to "prooving" it. Last edited by Pollock, 11Feb2008 at 20:09. 


Posts: 2029/2670
(11Feb2008 at 20:16) 
Quote:
If you have the number 1.51 and have to define it as an integer what will it be ? No grey areas just 2 or anything else  you would surely say 2. Likewise if you have an apple and take a bite of it what do you have in your hand one apple or zero?
Quote:
A thing that isnt proven can still be either right or wrong. Expressing something between boundaries still means it can be a fraction.
And yes, your right, it wasn't proven until 1761, but Archimedes had a working number that was very very close. (and you could say he most likely theorized that it was a irrational number, if we even realized the concept of irrational numbers back then) Thats similar to how alot of things in natural science are, they work, but there is no way to know 100% if they are absolutely correct under ever circumstance possible. And by the way, I'm still waiting for you to show me a instance where math is wrong (which you wont be able to do). "What about it?" "Oh nothing, it’s cute. We have five." "Ththousand." "Yes five thousand." "Don’t question it." 


Posts: 1713/2297
(11Feb2008 at 20:58) 
Math is not knowledge because it is completely independent of reality. There's no proof to 2+2=4, nor does it teach us anything.
Compare it to the following sentence: A bachelor is unmarried. Is that knowledge? Of course not. Don't use math in discussions about knowing. Modern world I'm not pleased to meet you 


Posts: 361/464
(11Feb2008 at 21:04) 
Quote:
There's no proof to 2+2=4, nor does it teach us anything.
I am the darkness in your life, I am the light I am the end of your tunnel, I am the beginning of your future I am the end, your end. I am the path to your salvation. Your bane, or your hope. You decide. 


Posts: 2030/2670
(11Feb2008 at 21:12) 
Quote:
Math is not knowledge because it is completely independent of reality. There's no proof to 2+2=4, nor does it teach us anything.
Im not going to even respond to that ridiculous statement, but I'll tell you what I was getting kinda tired of arguening this point, and you just made it all worth my while... I'm Soooooo tempted to make that lil tidbit my signature, just because its so out there, but I like my siggy..... "What about it?" "Oh nothing, it’s cute. We have five." "Ththousand." "Yes five thousand." "Don’t question it." 


Posts: 1714/2297
(11Feb2008 at 21:28) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
This is truly the most asinine statement I've EVER seen in UT since I've ever been a member here. There is no proof that 2+2=4??
Quote:
Are you serious? Prove that 2+2 =/= 4 and you might have something to go on.
Quote:
And it teaches us tons. Ever heard of physics? Geometry? Try and reconstruct the world without using these.
Modern world I'm not pleased to meet you 


Posts: 2032/2670
(11Feb2008 at 21:37) 
Build a bridge without using math....
Math obviously taught us how to do that...thats just one example of the top of my head. Prove to you how 2+2=4? OK Take 2 oranges, add two more, now you have 4. Remove 2 from the four, now you have 2. I have to go now, and I'm sure there is a more precise way of proving you that 2+2=4, but I think that pretty should cover it. If your really going to try to argue that 2+2 does not equal 4, ill elaborate I suppose. And this is still a monumentally pointless argument. Until one of you guys can show me one single instance where math is wrong you have nothing to stand on. "What about it?" "Oh nothing, it’s cute. We have five." "Ththousand." "Yes five thousand." "Don’t question it." 


Posts: 1715/2297
(11Feb2008 at 21:50) 
Re: 2 + 2 = 5
Prove to you how 2+2=4?
OK Take 2 oranges, add two more, now you have 4. Remove 2 from the four, now you have 2. I have to go now, and I'm sure there is a more precise way of proving you that 2+2=4, but I think that pretty should cover it. If you take two oranges and two oranges you have 4 oranges? But isn't that only true if you have already accepted that two + two is 4? How otherwise do you know that you have 4 oranges? That, my friend, is called circular reasoning.
Quote:
If your really going to try to argue that 2+2 does not equal 4, ill elaborate I suppose.
Quote:
And this is still a monumentally pointless argument. Until one of you guys can show me one single instance where math is wrong you have nothing to stand on.
This is its strength and its weakness at the same time. It can never be wrong because it's not based on the world, but it can't tell us anything about this world for the same reason. Modern world I'm not pleased to meet you Last edited by Caelis666, 11Feb2008 at 21:54. 

