The Instigator
TRUECRISTIAN
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
farm3r
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

PROOF that theoretical mathematics and physics are WRONG!!! I separate mathematics into three types:

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
farm3r
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/2/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 975 times Debate No: 58454
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (4)

 

TRUECRISTIAN

Pro

PROOF that theoretical mathematics and physics are WRONG!!!
I separate mathematics into three types: Theomathematics, real-world mathematics, and "theoretical" mathematics. Theomathematics is made up from what God tells us (like Pi = 3). This is the only branch that is without a doubt correct. Real world mathematics is what we deal with on a daily basis. I use this to maximize profits for Christian companies. We use it when we purchase something or count (1+1). Then there is "theoretical" mathematics...this is what the liberal EVILutionists try to force on us. It is a tool of SATAN. However, in the world of homosexual "science," if there is ONE flaw, JUST ONE, then it is proven incorrect. I HAVE FOUND THAT FLAW!! Here it is:

If you were to add up all the positive integers (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+...) all the way to infinite, what do you think that would equal? Logically, it just goes to infinite. We would say that it diverges to infinite and this can be shown through a divergence test which is used by those evil "scientists."

Well I have a proof that shows that this sum actually equals -1/12. That is crazy! Because those satanists say that it diverges! Well guess what? There "math" also shows that it CONVERGES to -1/12!! A series CANNOT be convergent and divergent!!

This is something I have worked on for quite some time. I have knowledge in their "field" so that I could prove them wrong. I have defeated one of SATAN'S TRICKS!!! Now that this is proven wrong, several sciences will collapse as well including physics and chemistry. TRUE CHRISTIANS ALWAYS WIN!

SHOUT GLORY!!!! PRAISE THE
__________________
And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. 1 Kings 7:23
farm3r

Con

Opening

My opponent is claiming that he can prove both theoretical mathematics and physics are wrong. This is obviously a bold claim, and I sincerely hope my opponent can win this debate so we can usher in a new age of correct mathematics and physics. It would be the finding of the century. Burden of proof is obviously on Pro, but I am sure he will be able to fulfill this burden. For this opening, I will simply lay out the groundwork of physics and 'theoretical mathematics'. Being a layman myself, please excuse my lack of sophistication and understanding on such a complex topic, I will only go over the basics of what my opponent has to disprove.

Theoretical Mathematics

While my opponent has outlined what 'Theomathematics' and 'Real-world mathematics' are, he has yet to explain 'Theoretical mathematics', other than claiming that "it is what the liberal EVILutionists try to force on us. It is a tool of SATAN.' Now, this is an incredibly strong claim. My opponent will first have to prove that 'Satan' definitely exists, and that evoltuionists are evil, which I am sure he will be able to do. Moving on to the definition.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I can tell, 'Theoretical mathematics' seems to be the same as 'Pure mathematics', as per Google. Now, Pure Mathematics is the study of abstract concepts, and was the basis of many things; physics, astronomy, engineering, etc.[1] What this means, in fact, is that 'Pure mathematics/Theoretical mathematics' does not consist solely of a set of definitive laws, but rather, is simply a branch of Mathematics responsible for the derivation of theories. In order for my opponent to meet his burden of proof, he will therefore have to disprove every single theory in Pure mathematics.

Physics

Physics is incredibly complex and responsible for a large number of physical discoveries and applications, including the way cars move, gravity, and the nuclear bomb. It would be a monumental discovery if my opponent was able to disprove the entire branch of physics (which is what he is trying to do as per resolution). There are numerous theories that my opponent has to disprove, as many of these theories are independent of each other. However, for starters, I simply challenge my opponent to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity, the big bang, and quantum chemistry.

My opponent's argument

My opponent says that if there is just 'one flaw', then it is proven incorrect. He has done his research guys - he is indeed correct! However, this is only true for one specific theory or idea; it does not extend to the entire branch of Mathematics/Physics. Having said that, I am having trouble understanding his infinite converging diverging sequence of numbers. I ask you to excuse my ignorance in this matter, but which specific theory does your converging diverging sequence disprove? And what about the other thousands of theories?

In summation, I wish my opponent luck in his endeavours and urge him to continue his research on our quest to discover a new turning point of modern maths and physics.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...;
Debate Round No. 1
farm3r

Con

I would like voters to note that my opponent has called me a 'nazi', but has failed to provide any evidence to support such a claim. I take great offence in such a derogatory and demeaning term, especially since I am Jewish.
Debate Round No. 2
TRUECRISTIAN

Pro

TRUECRISTIAN forfeited this round.
farm3r

Con

I guess my opponent has gone to work on his proof a bit more..
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by farm3r 2 years ago
farm3r
@TRUECHRISTIAN The debate is finished, but I would like to open your eyes a little. Okay, take a relatively large object, say... A house. A house is pretty big when you're in front of it right? It's obvious that you must be able to see it. Now walk away for 5 kilometres (or drive, but walking is healthier). Can you see the house? No? It's the same logic that can be applied to planets. The bible is also not the definitive answer to everything in life. The bible doesn't tell you that you should eat breakfast, lunch, or dinner, but if we didn't know about that we would all die.
Posted by TRUECRISTIAN 2 years ago
TRUECRISTIAN
cientists are talking about other planets like "Mars", "Jupiter", "Saturnus"(which sounds like Satan), "Venus" and so on, but does these planets really exist? I dont think so, cause if they were so big as the scientists describes them as, we would clearly see them in the sky! So i dont think they really exist, and frankly i dont care about it eighter. They arent even mentioned in The Bible, they are that unintresting, so why should we care? Also the scientists named these planets after pagan gods, which is just another proof that scientists are satanists and heathens. Those stupid scientists even claims that the sun is a million times bigger then the earth, then how come it isnt larger than a tennis ball when you look at it?
Posted by ArcTImes 2 years ago
ArcTImes
lol at Pro's second round.
Posted by TRUECRISTIAN 2 years ago
TRUECRISTIAN
There are several proofs. All are older than I. One was actually done by Riemann, a false idol to mathematicians and physicists. Physicists brag about how this is used in their demonic "quantum mechanics."
Posted by POPOO5560 2 years ago
POPOO5560
lol
Posted by POPOO5560 2 years ago
POPOO5560
lol
Posted by ArcTImes 2 years ago
ArcTImes
I can't believe I thought he was serious when I started reading.
Posted by Randomosity 2 years ago
Randomosity
Quote obviously.
Posted by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
This guy is a troll, right?
Posted by KhalifV 2 years ago
KhalifV
so what's the issue here? Are you saying you can disprove all math and theoretical physics?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
TRUECRISTIANfarm3rTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: troll + ff.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
TRUECRISTIANfarm3rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
TRUECRISTIANfarm3rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: ...nazi, need I say more?
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 2 years ago
Chrysippus
TRUECRISTIANfarm3rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: TC failed to make anything but incoherent unsubstantiated assertions, and stormed off. Point distribution is obvious.