Topic: The space between any two consecutive numbers is infinite

Anonymous A started this discussion 13 years ago #28,784

Therefore, counting, like all other science and mathematics, is based off of nothing more than assumptions and predictions.

Nothing is for certain; the universe is subjective.

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 47 seconds later[^] [v] #423,925

I have infinite apples.

Thanks.

Anonymous B double-posted this 13 years ago, 35 seconds later, 1 minute after the original post[^] [v] #423,926

And UNLIMITED HOTDOGS!

The space between the hotdogs is infinite.

(Edited 53 seconds later.)

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #423,927

Stupid.

The SPACE is not infinite. Take 4 and 5. There may be an uncountable number of points between 4 and 5, but the distance from 4 to 5 is 1.

Math is the only thing that IS certain.

(Edited 31 seconds later.)

Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 46 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #423,929

@previous (C)
yeah, no. jenkim will show you the error of your faggoty ways

(Edited 24 seconds later.)

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 2 hours later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #423,947

> mathematics is based off of nothing more than assumptions
This is sort of true, but not for the reasons you state.

> I found infinity
> therefore nothing makes sense
herp

postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 5 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #423,963

The space is not infinite, we can just theoretically use infinitely smaller incriments of measurement to measure the space. You idiot.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 7 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #424,040

@423,927 (C)
"1" is an assumption

@previous (postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk)
> Theoretically
Prediction.

Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 26 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #424,044

@previous (A)
You're an assumption. How do I even know that your logic is valid if I can't see you?

Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 24 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #424,045

@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
You can't know. That leaves only faith.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 39 seconds later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #424,046

@424,044 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Correct

@previous (B)
No, faith requires assumptions

Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 5 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #424,120

@424,040 (A)
Nope, 1 isn't an assumption if we accept the same axioms. Which, if you DONT accept, you're an idiot anyway so this argument is pointless.

Minichan