Anything is Possible

[Pax Unum]

If I try to turn myself into a wolf, the more times I try, the higher the chances are of me becoming a wolf.

never going to happen, what you propose is beyond the capabilities of the human body. Some insects and amphibians can metamorphose from an immature form into an adult form, but they cannot change back into their immature forms... or are you claiming humans are the immature form of a wolf? I’m sure this will be news to Mom and Dad wolf...

Edited August 30, 2008 by Pax Unum

[Picturesque Orion]

This is irrational! You cannot play around with methods of mathematics like this, ignoring it's laws and points! Not even to try to prove any point!

You cannot add up real numbers like that, MATHEMATICS has it's own rules and they are meant to be followed, if not, then the mathematics will be WRONG. And sir, what you've done there is TOTALLY WRONG.

Right now you are creating your OWN MATHEMATICS, your own methods, to try to prove your own point, which would only work in YOUR WORLD. This sums up together as ignorance of the laws of mathematics, theorems, and laws of physics all together!

[20SEP2008]

This is irrational! You cannot play around with methods of mathematics like this, ignoring it's laws and points! Not even to try to prove any point!

You cannot add up real numbers like that, MATHEMATICS has it's own rules and they are meant to be followed, if not, then the mathematics will be WRONG. And sir, what you've done there is TOTALLY WRONG.

Right now you are creating your OWN MATHEMATICS, your own methods, to try to prove your own point, which would only work in YOUR WORLD. This sums up together as ignorance of the laws of mathematics, theorems, and laws of physics all together!

But you can. But you can't.

If you do it won't make sense. If you won't then it will make sense.

The man who does it irrationally understands how it works.

The man who does is rationally doesn't understand how it works.

The man who does it irrationally doesn't understand how the rational man doesn't understand how it works.

The man who does it rationally doesn't understand how the irrational man understands how it works.

So does it really matter?

Right now you are creating your OWN MATHEMATICS, your own methods, to try to prove your own point, which would only work in YOUR WORLD. This sums up together as ignorance of the laws of mathematics, theorems, and laws of physics all together!

Exactly! Special mathematics with special methods to prove special points would work in special circumstances.

Now examine:

Normal mathematics with normal methods to prove normal points would work in normal circumstances.

You have to understand that there are two sides to it. The other people understand it, the normal people don't. That's how its supposed to be, opposite and equal.

In every situation that is exactly how it is.

I don't know where I'm going with this.

Yet at the same time,

I do know where I'm going with this.

Edited August 30, 2008 by llynx

[PulsE]

ok now i really get it, but not the real point of this thread

[Picturesque Orion]

But you can. But you can't.

If you do it won't make sense. If you won't then it will make sense.

The man who does it irrationally understands how it works.

The man who does is rationally doesn't understand how it works.

The man who does it irrationally doesn't understand how the rational man doesn't understand how it works.

The man who does it rationally doesn't understand how the irrational man understands how it works.

So does it really matter?

Exactly! Special mathematics with special methods to prove special points would work in special circumstances.

Now examine:

Normal mathematics with normal methods to prove normal points would work in normal circumstances.

You have to understand that there are two sides to it. The other people understand it, the normal people don't. That's how its supposed to be, opposite and equal.

In every situation that is exactly how it is.

I don't know where I'm going with this.

Yet at the same time,

I do know where I'm going with this.

I don't know what you're trying to point out either. Something mathematically wrong within mathematics IS INCORRECT. Numbers have an accurate order, and that is called mathematics, you alter that order and you're creating something totally different which is very far from correct, in other words, far from reality. This person is applying a mathematical method which cannot be used with real numbers in that way, because if so, it is incorrect and so the answer he is giving cannot exist. Don't you understand? Mathematics rules mathematics. General physics, rules general physics. Special Relativity rules relativity.

Everything has it's laws and points, and when altered, for whatever purpose, like in mathematics, it is incorrect and so the outcome cannot exist. I can't make it anymore clearer than that. Please think upon what I've just said.

[PulsE]

i will agree with that only if math and science is proven to be absolute

we know that we humans are the one who create math and science (unless you believe in Gods and/or ETs) knowing that we humans aren't perfect (unless if you haven't failed in any of your choices in your entire life) then our own science and math might also be imperfect

we can use common math and science on certain subjects to understand them, but not on all subjects

if we are bounded by hard proven (by science) information we limit ourselves in understanding some stuffs, sometimes its not bad to apply others system to understand what he is trying to say, of course we cannot understand him if we apply our own beliefs and knowledge on his own belief and knowledge, its just like you cannot understand what it is to be a tree unless you are a tree, you cannot understand me deeply because you are not me, but you can understand me by trying to be me even though you are not me

[Picturesque Orion]

i will agree with that only if math and science is proven to be absolute

we know that we humans are the one who create math and science (unless you believe in Gods and/or ETs) knowing that we humans aren't perfect (unless if you haven't failed in any of your choices in your entire life) then our own science and math might also be imperfect

we can use common math and science on certain subjects to understand them, but not on all subjects

if we are bounded by hard proven (by science) information we limit ourselves in understanding some stuffs, sometimes its not bad to apply others system to understand what he is trying to say, of course we cannot understand him if we apply our own beliefs and knowledge on his own belief and knowledge, its just like you cannot understand what it is to be a tree unless you are a tree, you cannot understand me deeply because you are not me, but you can understand me by trying to be me even though you are not me

Mathematics is a way of ordering events, and their consecuences via numbers, equations, geometry, and theorems. It's a way of ordering reality and prediciting it's outcome. This ,of course, has to go according with reality (in mathematical terms, mathematically correct), or the outcome cannot exist in our world (mathematically incorrect). If you create your own method, and it is incorrect, the outcome cannot exist. In an equation, the members of on side of the equation have to be equal to the members on the other side.

1+1=2 -----> 2=2 ----> Correct.

1+1=3 ------> 2=3 ----> Cannot exist in our world. If you sum up two sweets, you cannot end up with three. Two and three are not equal, two has less numeric value than three.

And I don't even want to comment the way he added up those numbers.

Science, is study, investigation and research. It is discovery and prediction. It is a method of knowledge and understanding, science is NOT religion. The laws of physics is how we observe the behaviour and consecuence of the events that take place in The Universe, these ways are common, and we have observed they follow certain points.

You are in a universe, where the laws of physics rule existence, the laws of physics will not permit you to change into a wolf, this is an observable event. In mathematics, you cannot equal 2 and 3.

sometimes its not bad to apply others system to understand what he is trying to say, of course we cannot understand him if we apply our own beliefs and knowledge on his own belief and knowledge, its just like you cannot understand what it is to be a tree unless you are a tree,

A very well made point, but I disagree. You can apply his system, but this does not change that this system cannot exist, and it's outcome is not possible. If you'd do so, you would be getting yourself involved in a different reality. Which is not the one in existence.

Belief and knowledge are very different from each other, belief is faith, while knowledge is the awareness of fact.

My conclusion is, everything is possible, under the laws of physics. But not independently.

[20SEP2008]

I don't know what you're trying to point out either. Something mathematically wrong within mathematics IS INCORRECT. Numbers have an accurate order, and that is called mathematics, you alter that order and you're creating something totally different which is very far from correct, in other words, far from reality. This person is applying a mathematical method which cannot be used with real numbers in that way, because if so, it is incorrect and so the answer he is giving cannot exist. Don't you understand? Mathematics rules mathematics. General physics, rules general physics. Special Relativity rules relativity.

Everything has it's laws and points, and when altered, for whatever purpose, like in mathematics, it is incorrect and so the outcome cannot exist. I can't make it anymore clearer than that. Please think upon what I've just said.

Oh boy, we have another law fan in the forum.

So assume you would say that it is impossible to travel faster than the speed of light?

It is a law. So anything else to counter that would be completely preposterous.

Tada!

It is possible to travel faster. And you can make Light travel faster as well.

So don't give me the whole laws are laws and you must follow them thing for it can only hold together so long until those laws will be broken or altered.

The only way to get something new is to question authority and thus, these laws.

BTW, Relativity? That has been proven to not exist under many situations in the universe. So I might as well prepare some irrational mathematics for those times now shouldn't I?

;D I understand your point. You are right. Yet you are wrong.

I am right. Yet I am wrong.

So lets not fight and lets go drink some tea. ;D

[20SEP2008]

i will agree with that only if math and science is proven to be absolute

we know that we humans are the one who create math and science (unless you believe in Gods and/or ETs) knowing that we humans aren't perfect (unless if you haven't failed in any of your choices in your entire life) then our own science and math might also be imperfect

we can use common math and science on certain subjects to understand them, but not on all subjects

if we are bounded by hard proven (by science) information we limit ourselves in understanding some stuffs, sometimes its not bad to apply others system to understand what he is trying to say, of course we cannot understand him if we apply our own beliefs and knowledge on his own belief and knowledge, its just like you cannot understand what it is to be a tree unless you are a tree, you cannot understand me deeply because you are not me, but you can understand me by trying to be me even though you are not me

Lovely stated mate ;D

[RunSwimSurf]

Only on paper can 1+1=3, not in reality.

Suppose x= y= 1.

Then x - 3/2= 1 - 3/2= -1/2

so (x- 3/2)^2= 1/4.

Also y- 3/2= 1- 3/2= -1/2

so (y- 3/2)^2= 1/4.

That is, (x- 3/2)^2- (y- 3/2)^2= 1/4- 1/4= 0.

Multiplying that out, (x^2- 3x+ 9/4) - (y^2- 3y+ 9/4)= 0 or, canceling the "9/4", x^2- 3x- y^2+ 3y= 0.

We can rewrite that as x^2- y^2= 3x- 3y.

Since x^2- y^2= (x+ y)(x- y) and 3x- 3y= 3(x- y), we have (x+ y)(x-y)= 3(x- y) and dividing both sides by x- y gives x+ y= 3 or, since x= y= 1, 1+ 1=3

But obviously there is an error in this proof

Edited August 31, 2008 by RunSwimSurf

[RunSwimSurf]

1 + 1 = 3

2 + 2 = 5

3 + 3 = 7

4 + 4 = 9

5 + 5 = 11

6 + 6 = 13

Again, on paper this can be correct, not in reality.

In math and physics, we use 'significant digits'.

1 has one significant digit. 1.0 has two significant digits.

Since 1 has one significant digit, it's margin of error is ±0.5 so 1 can fall anywhere between 0.5 and 1.4999999....

3 also has one significant digit...3 can fall between 2.5 and 3.49999....

When you add the numbers, you also add their margins of error:

1±0.5 + 1±0.5 = 2±1.0

Remember 3 can fall between 2.5 and 3.49999.... and this falls within 2±1.0 (which falls between 1.0 and 2.99999....)

So mathematically, 1+1=3 for large values of one OR small values of 3

Same with 2+2=5

2±0.5 + 2±0.5 = 4±1.0

See, a lot of things are mathematically possible on paper, but not in reality

How can four 0's equal 24?

(0! + 0! + 0! + 0!)! =24

but again, not in reality

Edited August 31, 2008 by RunSwimSurf

[Picturesque Orion]

Oh boy, we have another law fan in the forum.

If you're gonna make such a rude comment again, then consider this debate, over. I will only debate with mannered, intelligent individuals.

It is possible to travel faster. And you can make Light travel faster as well.

I very well think it is you, sir, who must read this article correctly, which I, have already read before.

And one thing which you have not noticed, the event described in such article has nothing to do with the laws of physics. But with General Relativity.

It is the way they plan the event, that does not violate the laws of physics. And so physically possible. I will quote some points from the article, which you have seem to have missed.

"The idea involves manipulating dark energy to propel a spaceship forward without breaking the laws of physics."

"The ship would be pushed by the spatial bubble and the bubble would be traveling faster than the speed of light."

It is not the ship itself which travelling at such speeds, this bubble is of null density and mass, like light, so able to do such archivement. Einstein stated, that to propel the ship itself to such speeds, would require infinite energy.

"Their notion is based on the Alcubierre drive, which proposes expanding space-time behind the spaceship while also shrinking space-time in front."

"The dark energy is simultaneously decreased just in front of the ship to decrease (and bring to a stop) the expansion rate of the universe in front of the ship," Cleaver told SPACE.com. "If the dark energy can be made negative directly in front of the ship, then space in front of the ship would locally contract."

The laws of physics have nothing to do in this case, but general relativity. And it disturbs me how, you, who seems to have very little knowledge on this topic, question Einstein's statements.

So don't give me the whole laws are laws and you must follow them thing for it can only hold together so long until those laws will be broken or altered.

The laws of physics are not something which are "followed", they are the way we observe the common behaviour and consecuence of events in The Universe. I see you don't know this either. This phenomenon has also given way to "General Logic". You seem to be ignoring that aswell, and so creating your own facts, which of course are, far from being real, far from being fact, what you are creating, sir, is your own belief, like turning into a wolf at will........

;D I understand your point. You are right. Yet you are wrong.

I am right. Yet I am wrong.

I hope you take the time to do some research and study, on this topic, before making another response. So that, in consecuence, your next response will be..better structured, intelligently written, and not just pure speculation.

The only way to get something new is to question authority and thus, these laws.

Only with observable and observated events, with logic and evidence. You lack all four. And let me remind you that using the word "authority" in this case, is totally incorrect.

Edited August 31, 2008 by Alex01

[20SEP2008]

If you're gonna make such a rude comment again, then consider this debate, over. I will only debate with mannered, intelligent individuals.

I very well think it is you, sir, who must read this article correctly, which I, have already read before.

And one thing which you have not noticed, the event described in such article has nothing to do with the laws of physics. But with General Relativity.

It is the way they plan the event, that does not violate the laws of physics. And so physically possible. I will quote some points from the article, which you have seem to have missed.

"The idea involves manipulating dark energy to propel a spaceship forward without breaking the laws of physics."

"The ship would be pushed by the spatial bubble and the bubble would be traveling faster than the speed of light."

It is not the ship itself which travelling at such speeds, this bubble is of null density and mass, like light, so able to do such archivement. Einstein stated, that to propel the ship itself to such speeds, would require infinite energy.

"Their notion is based on the Alcubierre drive, which proposes expanding space-time behind the spaceship while also shrinking space-time in front."

"The dark energy is simultaneously decreased just in front of the ship to decrease (and bring to a stop) the expansion rate of the universe in front of the ship," Cleaver told SPACE.com. "If the dark energy can be made negative directly in front of the ship, then space in front of the ship would locally contract."

The laws of physics have nothing to do in this case, but general relativity. And it disturbs me how, you, who seems to have very little knowledge on this topic, question Einstein's statements.

The laws of physics are not something which are "followed", they are the way we observe the common behaviour and consecuence of events in The Universe. I see you don't know this either. This phenomenon has also given way to "General Logic". You seem to be ignoring that aswell, and so creating your own facts, which of course are, far from being real, far from being fact, what you are creating, sir, is your own belief, like turning into a wolf at will........

I hope you take the time to do some research and study, on this topic, before making another response. So that, in consecuence, your next response will be..better structured, intelligently written, and not just pure speculation.

Only with observable and observated events, with logic and evidence. You lack all four. And let me remind you that using the word "authority" in this case, is totally incorrect.

I'm really sorry sir. I didn't mean to inflict any offense onto you.

I've actually been fooling around on this topic. I'm surprised some of your intellect took my first post seriously.

I'm just messing with the idea. ;D I would recommend you calm down, it is only an internet forum ;D

Once again, I meant no offense, and if I did offend then I apologize.

But I have to admit, this situation is quite funny, but probably frustrating on your end.

Well, Good night.

[PulsE]

ok i know science and math is systematically study of things, it can explain various observable stuffs

but science and math is not always applied in the head of some of us, like the topic starter which stated that 1+1=3, in this case it surely doesn't exist in reality but it does in his mind, now how can we get his point if we are not trying to use his own system to understand him, knowing that math in reality doesn't apply in his statement, for sure we cannot understand his point and simply say its illogical and wrong

the important thing here, i guess, is what his trying to prove, its not the system he use but its his point, maybe the wrong thing is that he uses some system which is not applicable in the view of majority

[nohands]

math and science are man's creation though he did not created it himself..it is composed of lots of theories, ideas, formulas etc by other man and other man and other man(agreed when it is in synchronizity).. although i believe that this creation will be gone whenever i sleep..where it is before when i was not born?? it is just creation...

well done mad hatter you just have created your own reality...

Edited September 4, 2008 by nohands

[vangalapati]

No,anything is not possible without doing anything.

It possible,if we work hard for that issuse with interest.

Sincerity,Determination and hardworking can make anything possible.

================================================================================

====================================================

timothy1

freeastro

[ethereal scout]

1+1=3 is possible IMO.

Don't think MadHatter is mad at all - just challenging conventional arithmatic by playing with maths.

In Arithmatic 1+1=2

In Maths 1+1=3 can happen IMO - however not in Arithmatic.

Arithmatic and Maths, whilst both using numbers - are different topics.

[pinkmonk98]

That doesn't make any sense to me and i don't think anything is possible. you can't become God or anything... unless you hallucinate..?

[ethereal scout]

1+1=3

Well. In my perspective I find that anything IS technically possible. Now me being an Athiest, why would I say that? Well let's see here. The universe is conceptually infinitely endless. So therefore what does that mean? To me it means that the universe has endless possibilities. Why? Because there's always another number another combination and another aspect to life. Anyone can do anything under the right circumstances. Does that mean under the same exact circumstances two different options are possible. No not at all. Under the exact same circumstance the same thing will happen. But there are limitless cirumstances. Some people theorize the universe is physically endless as well. I wouldn't be suprised. Therefore I propose to you something.

1+1 never equals 3.

Why? Because 1 is a symbol. 1 STANDS for the CONCEPT of a single thing. So no matter how you look at it 1 will be 1 whether 1 is called 2,3,4,5,6 or ooga booga for that matter, the concept continues to remain. You can't get rid of a concept change it or delete it. Why? Because a concept is what is. Relatively and universally.

Now before you say a concept is what you percieve it to be...Tell me...is 1 able to be suddenly equal 2? Nope.

So ultimately the point is you can't change a concept. You can change the representation. But not the concept itself.

I may sound like a hypocrite saying there are infinite concepts then saying 1+1=3 but truthfully even though the concepts are infinite. Each individual concept still can't be changed.

look around you.

[ethereal scout]

or find a quiet place somewhere a read a book, either way works.

[Pelican_Eel]

good job, Mad Hatter