(Inspired by Reddit post of the last month)

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    ACKTUALLY neither. It’s most simply thought of as a limit of progressively longer sums. Infinitesimals help people understand but they’re kind of logically questionable.

    • nLuLukna @sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Actually that last point isn’t quite right, in the 1960s Robinson proved that the set of hyperreals were logically consistent if and only if the reals were.

      This put to rest the age-long speculation that the hyperreals were questionable.

      This speculation is a pain in the ass since it means that we primarily use limits when talking about this sort of thing.

      Which is fine, but infinitesimals are the coolest shit ever

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I did know about hyperreals, which is why I went with just “questionable”. IIRC you lose things like commutativity and associativity of arithmetic when you include extra numbers in the real line, and I feel like numbers should really have those.

        Maybe that’s just my opinion though. Should I edit it?

        Edit: I remembered very wrong. Fixing.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            There was self-parodying irony here you might have missed. KnowYourMeme

            I feel like discussion opportunities were present. In fact, a discussion about hyperreals did start, and I learned something in the process.

            • MrShankles@reddthat.com
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I do know the meme, but your use of it and your earlier statement of “I get the feeling you haven’t solved many”; does not really convey irony, but rather, an elitist attitude that doesn’t leave an openness for discussion. Without openness for discussion on a forum, there is little opportunity for an openness to learn.

              So discussion may have occurred on the topic, by way of someone proving you wrong; but that leaves you as the only one learning, without offering the same opportunities to casual commentors.

              The “irony” is that a cheeky comment went over your head, you began a closed-format lecture, and then you later tried to use irony yourself in another response (expecting to receive the same understanding that you yourself missed earlier).

              So now maybe, we both have learned something. But it was through “ackchyually’s” and “one-upping”, rather than through openness. Be kind, be patient, be understanding, be welcoming… that helps nurture honest discourse