# Thread: Simple math.. lol jk

1. Is this the sacred geometry thread?

2. Originally Posted by Munchies
Not sure if i get where you want me to get going.... but it applies to all life.

the .999_ can represent any enclosed system (tomato, human, expanding universe) which is growing, the inner componants are of an indefinite number, but on the outside it is just perceived as 1.

not sure what you want since i don't know anyhting besides time:P but maybe on a bigger picture, everything is interconnected through magnitism/ or a stringlike substance(lol). I don't know. But i know behind th 1 divided by 3 has major significance not only because of common sense, but because Telsa even said "If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe." i'll be forever researching. 1 divided by 3 is .333, .666, .999. aka the trinity. really interesting
Time, though, seems to be one thing that can manipulate both an "inner system" and an "outer system". If time is irrelevant, and it does exist, then wtf? There's a joke that goes around...

In fact, there is a story circulating among scientists of an immigrant to America who has lost his watch. He walks up to a man on a New York street and asks, "Please, Sir, what is time?" The scientist replies, "I'm sorry, you'll have to ask a philosopher. I'm just a physicist."
Funny thing is, philosophers don't seem to have anymore an idea than anyone else.

3. Originally Posted by Evan
That's not really a good example, because in that case, the truth of the statement is predicated on relative velocity, which means before you can call it true or false, you need to define the observer's velocity.

With .9repeating = 1, there is no variable condition to predicate the truth or falsehood. They are literally synonyms -- they refer to exactly the same concept.
Exactly. It's the same concept. Before you can evaluate .9repeating = 1, as true or false, you have to have a reference point. But the "reference point" can be both "inside" or "outside", neither of these points are invalid, just different. They serve different purposes. So, depending on your reference point .9repeating=1 can be true, or false, depending.

4. I think you're all high.

5. Originally Posted by xisnotx
Time, though, seems to be one thing that can manipulate both an "inner system" and an "outer system". If time is irrelevant, and it does exist, then wtf? There's a joke that goes around...

Funny thing is, philosophers don't seem to have anymore an idea than anyone else.
It is observed in the double slit experiment with electrons that observation has a direct effect with the trajectory of the electron. Without the observation, the electron will hit the wall at infinite potential going anythrough both slits or none or any other potential. With the observation, it allows the electron to flow through the double slit as if it were flowing on the wave of light, since it hits the board in the same way the light moves through the double slit.

My guess is the electron (or inner system) is running on it's own time (who knows, maybe this universe is an electron:P). The observation made the electron have only one possible trajectory. I think the electron has infinite trajectory potential because it is already running on it's inner clock/time, so on the outside there is 0 or infinite time unless time is observed upon it(infinite and 0 are the same number, there. it explains why there is infinite potential on the outside i think).

Without observation, the electron has infinite possibility. My understanding is that our reality or unviverse or timline is being held together by observation. It was never fully known what conciousness has to do with the universe and i plan to think of it some more :P

6. Indeed, a lot of people don't understand math. For example, they don't understand that it's a self-referential system of notation.

Originally Posted by Evan
That's not really a good example, because in that case, the truth of the statement is predicated on relative velocity, which means before you can call it true or false, you need to define the observer's velocity.

With .9repeating = 1, there is no variable condition to predicate the truth or falsehood. They are literally synonyms -- they refer to exactly the same concept.
Exactly. This is as insightful as discovering that a triangle has three sides.

Originally Posted by xisnotx
Exactly. It's the same concept. Before you can evaluate .9repeating = 1, as true or false, you have to have a reference point. But the "reference point" can be both "inside" or "outside", neither of these points are invalid, just different. They serve different purposes. So, depending on your reference point .9repeating=1 can be true, or false, depending.
That's not how math works. In fact, math immediately stops working when you decide that you will apply the rules variably depending on your purposes.

7. Originally Posted by rhinosaur

I think you're all high.
Thumbs up!

8. Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
That's not how math works. In fact, math immediately stops working when you decide that you will apply the rules variably depending on your purposes.
1. I noticed. It sucks.
2. I was using "math" to illustrate a concept that can be understood as inherent in the nature of any system of thought...including math.

9. Originally Posted by Munchies
.999_ is forever expanding, but on an outside perspective, it is just 1. Just like how this universe is infinitly expanding, but on the outside would just be perceived as 1 sphere. So to say that .999 = 1 is false and true at the same time. the .999_ and the 1 are the same thing but on different dimentions, the .999_ being the expanding inner universe, and the 1 being an outside view.

However, they teach you that .999_= 1... they do not teach you the multidimentional thinking so you must be skeptical of education.

So yes .999_ = 1, but you were never taught to think on such a scale. If you can visualize it you will realize an infinite pattern.
Actually, I would find it quite strange if my math teacher suddenly came with philosophical explanations and analogies for such concepts. The fact that the infinite patter you associate with .999_ could be thought of as similar to our universe expanding is not a matter of pure mathematics (as I see it), reason why this thread's in the Philosophy and Spirituality category. The concept of an "infinite pattern" also brought to my mind fractals, which also have a mathematical basis. Education (or the educational system, if you prefer) could be blamed for several things, but not making such correlation between distinct subjects (correlations which may also be controversial) is not one of them.
On the other hand, philosophy is a subject that, as studied in school, focuses on many other aspects.

There is an interesting BBC documentary, "How long is a piece of string?" in which one man explores quantum mechanics. He speaks with various people involved in science at different levels and he learns that the piece of string he wants to measure could also be infinite (if we think of it as having infinite patterns inside itself in a way similar to fractals)

I'd also have to say they teach you that .999_=1, so yes, you were taught to think on such a scale. They may not say it in a blunt manner, since this equality lays under a question mark, so to speak. This thread reminded me of the rather complex operation of dividing by 0. You could say that x/0 equals infinity, although you were earlier taught that you cannot divide by 0 and concrete thinking tells you that doing so would be both impossible and pointless (mathematics is abstract, after all).

I wouldn't really say that we weren't taught to "think on such a scale", going deep into this "theory" simply does not lead to much if we have math in mind. Philosophically speaking, you can do that in order to put your mind to work and you could also read books by mathematicians and/or philosopher that treat such perspectives.

10. Originally Posted by Daemon Corax
Actually, I would find it quite strange if my math teacher suddenly came with philosophical explanations and analogies for such concepts. The fact that the infinite patter you associate with .999_ could be thought of as similar to our universe expanding is not a matter of pure mathematics (as I see it), reason why this thread's in the Philosophy and Spirituality category. The concept of an "infinite pattern" also brought to my mind fractals, which also have a mathematical basis. Education (or the educational system, if you prefer) could be blamed for several things, but not making such correlation between distinct subjects (correlations which may also be controversial) is not one of them.
On the other hand, philosophy is a subject that, as studied in school, focuses on many other aspects. You are only taught accedemics in university, it must be taught to lower grades. They are highly capable. A childs mind is much more open than that of an adult. I think a more intuitive way of thinking should be taught and more individal improvement focus rather than grades and class average.

There is an interesting BBC documentary, "How long is a piece of string?" in which one man explores quantum mechanics. He speaks with various people involved in science at different levels and he learns that the piece of string he wants to measure could also be infinite (if we think of it as having infinite patterns inside itself in a way similar to fractals) Yes and you can never cut two peices of wood the exact same size since the - magnification seems to go on for infinity.

I'd also have to say they teach you that .999_=1, so yes, you were taught to think on such a scale. They may not say it in a blunt manner, since this equality lays under a question mark, so to speak. This thread reminded me of the rather complex operation of dividing by 0. You could say that x/0 equals infinity, although you were earlier taught that you cannot divide by 0 and concrete thinking tells you that doing so would be both impossible and pointless (mathematics is abstract, after all).

I wouldn't really say that we weren't taught to "think on such a scale", going deep into this "theory" simply does not lead to much if we have math in mind. Philosophically speaking, you can do that in order to put your mind to work and you could also read books by mathematicians and/or philosopher that treat such perspectives. we weren't, you had a point in your first paragragh when you said that bit about corelations, but it is controversial. Philosophicaly speaking, nobody really knows anyhting for sure, at all. Since there is not an absolute science towards what conciousness has to do with reality and also no absolute sciencec for anything quantum... so common conceptions of math is irrelevant when trying to seek the deepest answers to the deepest questions of life. Because deeper conceptions can always be realized. This thread is merly speculation on a subject not know to man (to my perception), so old concepts of "accedemia" are irrelevant when trying to uncover new things (that's to that infj guy)
I know it's quite a subject to teach. I was never taught that 0 was just as infinite as + infinity. Indefinite. I would of at least like to have been put in a gifted class so i wouldn't be learning the petty repetitive memorization tasks. I honestly saw a lot of shit while in highschool with dead end theories just to block further inquiry of thought... but I understand that education shouldnt be made to make everyone into genuis' because then who will take out the trash and work at shitty dead end jobs.

and i don't trust education to begin with. The imperial system is shit and is based on memorization, no intuition involved. Im glad i was taught the metric system in canada. But here in canada we don't get taught about poltics, but the government encourages christian teachings.Nothing of poltical science( because there is no science to Politics it's all bs) I could go on

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•