Simple math.. lol jk

[Munchies]

1 divided by 3 is 3 infinite parts, these 3 infinite parts added together = a static unchanging number? Something so simple but so complex.


.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. The .999_ only = 1 from an outside view where time is irrelevant ( hense the effects of perception on the electron during a double slit experiment)

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.

 

[xisnotx]

Why time?
Lol, good job though.

 

[redacted]

So to say that .999 = 1 is false and true at the same time.

.9repeating is just another way to write 1. Nothing mystical about it.

1/3 = .3repeating
3/3 = .9repeating
1 = .9repeating

or you can do this:
x = .9repeating
10x = 9.9repeating
10x - x = 9.9repeating - .9repeating
9x = 9
x = 1

You should maybe use a different analogy.

 

[FDG]

These parts are not infinite, per se - materially, I mean. They simply cannot be represented by real numbers with a finite number of decimals.

 

[1487610420]

These parts are not infinite, per se - materially, I mean. They simply cannot be represented by real numbers with a finite number of decimals.

Orly

 

[Lark]

There really is a hell of a lot of evidence for the existence of God when you think about it, infinity is only one, ordered cosmos is another, music would be another I would suggest.

 

[Munchies]

There really is a hell of a lot of evidence for the existence of God when you think about it, infinity is only one, ordered cosmos is another, music would be another I would suggest.

Yes. When you divide 1 into three, you get the trinity, triforce, triunity. in the beggining there was nothing, but somehow that nothing was infinite nothingness which it's existance equalls everything. It's why the triangle with an eye is such a popular symbol, the triangle = the trinity and theyi are all infinitly 1, hense the eye of infinity in the middle. It goes on but yeh, you get the point. Interesting shit they will never teach you in school

 

[Munchies]

.9repeating is just another way to write 1. Nothing mystical about it.

1/3 = .3repeating
3/3 = .9repeating
1 = .9repeating

or you can do this:
x = .9repeating
10x = 9.9repeating
10x - x = 9.9repeating - .9repeating
9x = 9
x = 1

You should maybe use a different analogy.

I don't think i have to? you didn't disprove it you just listed a bunch of things, with no philosophical insight whatsoever. Please try again This is a philosophical subject deeper than math, equations don't philosphicaly speak for themselves

 

[Munchies]

These parts are not infinite, per se - materially, I mean. They simply cannot be represented by real numbers with a finite number of decimals.

So they can't be represented by real numbers... is infinite a real number?

A:it is an indefinite number and can't be represented by "real" numbers... kinda like 0.3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333_ right?


I'm pretty sure you validated my point

 

[Munchies]

Why time?
Lol, good job though.

there can only be one reality according to one perception.


The .999_ is expanding infinitly in all directions (a sphere), from an outside perspective, your observation uppon the .999_ (or electron when refering to the double slit experiment) would make it 1 with your time, while the inside is functioning on it's own time. It's why observation makes our physical dimention interact with the electron in the double slit experiment, Without our observation on it/our time acting upon it, physical matter manifested in our dimention doesn't interact with it, it is non existant to the electron. The time is irrelevant.




IMO

 

[CuriousFeeling]

Infinite numbers... easy as 22/7

 

[redacted]

I don't think i have to? you didn't disprove it you just listed a bunch of things, with no philosophical insight whatsoever. Please try again This is a philosophical subject deeper than math, equations don't philosphicaly speak for themselves

I didn't disprove what?

You said .9repeating = 1 is both true and not true. That is false.

I have no comment on the rest of your philosophical musings because I don't really understand them.

 

[xisnotx]

there can only be one reality according to one perception.


The .999_ is expanding infinitly in all directions (a sphere), from an outside perspective, your observation uppon the .999_ (or electron when refering to the double slit experiment) would make it 1 with your time, while the inside is functioning on it's own time. It's why observation makes our physical dimention interact with the electron in the double slit experiment, Without our observation on it/our time acting upon it, physical matter manifested in our dimention doesn't interact with it, it is non existant to the electron. The time is irrelevant.




IMO

Why limit your insight to just time? What other natural phenomena does this apply to?

(Idk yet, time is the most obvious..but surely not the only one?)

 

[xisnotx]

You said .9repeating = 1 is both true and not true. That is false.

And it's also true, depending on how you look at it.

The question becomes then: how can something be both true and false? It's weird, but, somethings are both true and false, depending on how you look at them..or rather where you're looking from. Science proves this in the real world, as much as science can prove anything. Another interesting question: through what medium do we look at anything? If we could establish that, could we then establish what a mediumless perspective would like?

Time, I think, is just one barrier towards a mediumless (or perspectiveless or universaless) medium/ perspective/ universe. Certainly time isn't the end all and be all of the universe. Biology seems to transcend time, or at least manipulates it. I'm sure people can come up with others..lol.

What I'm interested in is what practical applications does this reality promise?

 

[redacted]

And it's also true, depending on how you look at it.

You are using definitions that would be rejected by the academic community. A proposition is either true or false, not both. That's just the way it works.

If you want to define it otherwise, that's fine... maybe this thread just isn't for me.

 

[Munchies]

You are using definitions that would be rejected by the academic community. A proposition is either true or false, not both. That's just the way it works.

If you want to define it otherwise, that's fine... maybe this thread just isn't for me.

you already said you didn't understand the philosophy behind what was proposed, no use making judgment calls on something you havn't completly perceived.

 

[Munchies]

Why limit your insight to just time? What other natural phenomena does this apply to?

(Idk yet, time is the most obvious..but surely not the only one?)

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 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

 

[Lark]

Yes. When you divide 1 into three, you get the trinity, triforce, triunity. in the beggining there was nothing, but somehow that nothing was infinite nothingness which it's existance equalls everything. It's why the triangle with an eye is such a popular symbol, the triangle = the trinity and theyi are all infinitly 1, hense the eye of infinity in the middle. It goes on but yeh, you get the point. Interesting shit they will never teach you in school

Geometary in service of the grand high architect of all

 

[xisnotx]

You are using definitions that would be rejected by the academic community. A proposition is either true or false, not both. That's just the way it works.

If you want to define it otherwise, that's fine... maybe this thread just isn't for me.

Actually, not really. Higher academia is full of examples where something is true or false, depending. It's both true, and false, that an object is moving at a certain speed depending on where you are in relation to that object. Depending on your frame of reference, your perspective, the universe from which you are looking at something, that thing's nature is different. Is it "two different things" or is it "the same thing, interpreted in two different ways by our perception"?

 

[redacted]

Actually, not really. Higher academia is full of examples where something is true or false, depending. It's both true, and false, that an object is moving at a certain speed depending on where you are in relation to that object. Depending on your frame of reference, your perspective, the universe from which you are looking at something, that thing's nature is different. Is it "two different things" or is it "the same thing, interpreted in two different ways by our perception"?

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.