Math Debate - Vi-spex's choice of topic
Debate Rounds (5)
I have seen many people debate vi_spex on math topics in ways that don't always address the big picture. I will debate any math topic vi_spex wants, most preferrably that any finite number times zero is zero.
so what happens when adding no time 1 time, to whatever the number 1 is defined by? what does that mean
only the time of now is true
1+0=1 is a false equation, as something can never be added to nothing, and nothing can never be added to something
1+0 means, 1, or to show it didn't go through, 1+0(1)
any equation that equals 0 is false, so this can only be explained not equated
I would like to begin by pointing out my opponent's misuse of the = sign. The proper usage of this symbol involves the equating of two expressions, and an expression can be any of the following:
A number: eg 1, 14, 35293255235, etc.
A variable: eg x, y, z, etc.
A monomial: eg 3x, 28zy, 32x^4, etc.
A polynomial: eg 4x 5, 7x^4 - 18x, etc.
Given that, let us examine what my opponent has attempted to equate:
RIght off the bat, we can see that "no time" is NOT an expression, as it does not fall into any of the categories for one. Additionally, 0 is simply a number, and can be used to express information, but scientifically, unless you use unit cancellation, you cannot simply add or remove unit names for no reason, even if we accept that 0 automatically means 0 seconds.
Neither of these are expressions. Additionally, they cannot even be said to mean the same concept. "false" is a descriptive word about the boolean aspect of a statement. "no time" is merely an amount of time. The two cannot be said to be equated.
Irrelevant and incorrect for the same reasons as before.
The second set of faulty equations falls under the same rebuttals.
"so what happens when adding no time 1 time, to whatever the number 1 is defined by? what does that mean"
What it means is that there is one occurrence of adding 0 to 1, which results in, not surprisingly, one.
"only the time of now is true"
Settings cannot be "true", only statements can.
"1 0=1 is a false equation, as something can never be added to nothing, and nothing can never be added to something"
Why not? If I have a salt shaker, and I do nothing to it, I am inactively adding nothing to it.
"any equation that equals 0 is false, so this can only be explained not equated"
Why is an equation false because one of its sides is 0? That doesn't follow at all. Here is an example:
Clearly zero is equal to itself.
Let's see if we can solve the expressions 1 0 and 1*0 by graphing them.
Looking at the graphs of y=x and y=x+1, we can see that adding 1 to 0 results in 1, while multiplying 1 by 0 results in 0.
Over to vi_spex.
no time is false because time is true, like no thing and something
Show you zero bananas? Okay. Don't blink or you'll miss it.
There. There were zero bananas in that clump of blank space.
In what way is time true? One is a dimensional concept, the other a boolean descriptor. The two aren't compatible linguistically.
there can never be 0 bananas in space, as 0 bananas are not real
Why would you have seen any bananas? There were zero of them!
Zero just means none of in this case, so all I did was show you no bananas. Hence, any place in which there are not bananas can be said to have zero bananas.
how could you have shown me when I didn't see any
You wouldn't have seen any because there were zero bananas there. Zero bananas is the same as no bananas.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.