Secret of creation...

I thought I would share the secret to creation while I was waiting for my corps to build.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

How something can be made of nothing, let me show you.

We know this for a fact, nothing is not the same as something.

0 ¹ 1.

Nothing cannot be something. Nothing is represented by 0 since it has no value and something, previously represented by 1, will be represented by X since it can have any value.

Therefore, 0 ¹ X.

If we said that 0 = X, then we would be saying that nothing is something which is preposterous as existence in and of itself no matter what dimension of it is measured, thought, action, mass, etc., undeniably exists.

Therefore, 0 ¹ X.

Now, if something is not the same as nothing, defined as something is not equal to nothing. Then how do you make something out of nothing? First let us show that something is equal to something, and does not equal nothing (double negative is required).

Therefore, X = X and 0 ¹ X.

Now, how do you make something out of nothing? Well we must remove the opposite of something, which contrary to popular belief, would not be nothing. For our purposes, let us call this an anti-something and represent this with -X. Now if we add anti-something to both sides of our something equals something, we will undoubtedly get nothing on both sides. Instead of simplifying the equation on both sides, let us only simplify one side, this makes all the difference.

So, X + -X = X + -X.
Therefore, 0 = X + -X.

You may be thinking, "Sir, you have contradicted yourself in your answer, X + -X = 0 which is still 0 = 0, so you have still made nothing out of nothing. I defy you to prove that you have made something out of nothing." I would say, prove that making nothing is the same as making something plus anti-something. I can prove otherwise.

0 / (X + -X) = (X + -X) / (X + -X)

This can be turned into:

0 / (X + -X) = X / (X + -X) + -X / (X + -X)

Which when you divide everything:

0 / (X + -X) = 0 / 0 = 0
X / (X + -X) = X / 0 = undefined
-X / (X + -X) = -X / 0 = undefined

Therefore, 0 = und. + und.

So, I did not in fact make nothing. I made two undefined values, something (X / 0) and anti-something (-X / 0). You may be thinking, "Well, if you did your math right something and anti-something would be defined, as they are undefined they may may as well be nothing." I would say, I can yet again make something out of nothing, this time with no undefined numbers or even variables.

0 ^ (X + -X) = (X + -X) ^ (X + -X)

This can be turned into:

0 ^ (X + -X) = (X + -X) ^ X * (X + -X) ^ -X

Each value will be:

0 ^ (X + -X) = 0 ^ 0 = 1 (binomial theorem)
(X + -X) ^ X = 0 ^ X = 0
(X + -X) ^ -X = 0 ^ -X = 0 / X = 0

So, 1 = 0 + 0.
Therefore, 0 = 1.

I have made something out of nothing. *takes a bow*<!-/Quote-!>

Thanks for sharing, I don't think I could have lived another day being denied that knowledge.

Indeed, something out of nothing happens every day.

Haha, good work, this forum has been in need of something requiring a few brain cells, but your reasoning relies on a few assumptions. I'm not a mathmetician, but i can respond to the general concepts used.

Firstly in:

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

So, X + -X = X + -X.<!-/Quote-!>

You justify that in removing xsomething from xsomething you achieve 'nothing', which at first glance seems a balanced statement. But, (delving into thought experiments here) if you have a room with just a chair inside and you remove that chair, do you have nothing? No, you have an empty room that once contained a chair. For there to be 'nothing' there would have to be something, because we could not comprehend the application of 'nothing' in the material world, as to do so would be to try and imagine a situation in which we would not exist (go on, try it).

Furthermore, there cannot be such a thing as a total opposite in this applied reality. To continue with the previous situation, there is no such thing as an 'anti-chair,' the process of removing it from the room is not one, it is an action and thus not a positive addition but a changing of the components in the equation. 'Opposites' are just variants in the way we perceive things.

With regards to things and antithings, in any action and reaction in a material object the ultimate result can be seen as a change of quality of form, not the creation of 'something' or 'nothing.'

All in all it was a good hypothetical twist on reasoning, but cannot be applied to the world in which we live.

Nimz, the resident Mathematician says, regarding any errors..

"0^-X ≠ 0/X is the most blatant."


but i think you are special nonetheless


^____^ \/..

(though, i have no idea why its an error.

but nimz is nimz. he is made of magic)

Infinity^0= 1

There I have made everything into 1 whats your point?

'To continue with the previous situation, there is no such thing as an 'anti-chair,'

Actually. There is matter and there is antimatter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

Every object has an opposite.
this brings us upon a law of physics that may not be recognized for such a conversation.
"every action has an equal to or greater reaction."

/side note- Does this prove Karma? You be the judge.

So lets add in this equation.

M= matter A=antimatter.

add in the law of physics we'll signify with= P


So once again.
M= Matter
A= Antimatter
P= laws of physics

0 still means nothing.

0(M+P)= 0(A+P)= 0(M=P)= 0(M=P)

By creating something you create nothing.

Now lets take a look at how the universe works. In Cycles. The water cycle, nitrogen cycle, oxygen cycle. The moons orbit...etc etc
This implys that eventually something becomes nothing and nothing becomes something.

"How is that possible?"

Lets take a deeper look at the universe. What is the most basic make up of everything? Energy.
As long as energy flows the light stays on. Flip off the switch. Kill the current. and the light goes off. Then turn the switch back on and the light turns back on.
If for some reason the energy currents of the universe were to reverse, it would result in an opposite of what exists today.

Now what exactly is nothing? Nothing is, in fact, something. Nothing is nothing and everything is something. In a sense, something has always existed. In one form or another.

"again, how is this possible?"
We all know that Energy can be moved, harnaced, transformed, stored up, released and channeled. It cannot, however, be destroyed.
Taking this knowledge and applying this to our current discussion.

Energy is something that makes up everything. This also means that there is, in theory, an antienergy exist. Take our previous points of 0(m+p)= 0(a+p).
This means that Matter, energy and therefore existences inevitably becomes Antiexistence or nothing. And vise versa.
Hence- life and death.

now lets compare this theory to a modern religion.
In Hinduism, it is believed that there are cycles of existence and nonexistence (Wow!). Every now and then, an old cycle ends and a new one begins.

basically A+A=A as apposed to A+B=C.

this means that if something exists, it has and always will exist in some form.
Not saying this means an afterlife as most religions view it. More like we are just a light on a pannel. When a circuit guides energy to it, it lights up. Then the circuit divertes the energy and the light goes dim.

However, when your light goes dim, another lights up that will one day go dim. Endless flickering of lights.

Now lets delve into "Why are we here?"
"Why" is a lot different than "How". Ultimately harder to conceptualise.
What seperates us from most other matter?
we exist and a rock exists. We exist and corral exists.
What is that little thing that sets us apart?
not the thumbs. Not just a mechanically inclined brain.

The few things that sets us apart from even Monkeys are- (drumroll please) the abilities to contemplate our existence, the ability of emotional and spiritual love and the ability to understand and end suffering. That that is also known as "compassion and Understanding"

In one post I have answered "How" and "Why".
/me pats own back

Hehe a nice reply i guess. But answer me this.

Irrefutably prove to me that you are not dreaming right now, then i will believe in your physics!

P.S. You can't, it's a centuries old problem.

I am aware of the physics you are quoting however, and like any unproven theory (Antimatter, Darkmatter, Darkenergy) the end result (how we experience the world) is justified by the means (the theory).

For example, we know there is not enoguh gravity to hold the universe together, so we invent the theory of dark matter. There is no evidence for it- it is impossible to detect, but it's subsumed into scientific 'fact' because something MUST be doing it's job. That is knowledge or truth, that is just the element of chance presenting unjustified 'knowledge.'

touche...to a point.

That long winded response was actually just an over complicated way of saying-

ehem..

"We cannot know what is going on. We are, after all, just along for the ride. So why not enjoy it."

/side note- enjoying it, does not mean you can be a dick. I mean, of course, dick in the sense of being a jerk in any and all forms.
Thank you

0 is not nothing. It is the sum of x and -x.
Two equal and opposite forces do not create nothing, they create a balance.
Nothing is the abscense of eveything. 0 as definfed above is the product of 2 opposites. Not the same as nothing at all.

0^0 isn't 1. You might as well have just said 1=0^(X-X) = 0^(X)*0^(-X) = 0*0 = 0 if you're going to do that

And people are being far too philosophical about what 1-1=0 means

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

0 / (X + -X) = 0 / 0 = 0<!-/Quote-!>

No.

It's still an indetermination, even when the numerator is 0.

42

i agree the answer is 42

Anti-matter isn't an unproven theory... it is matter composed of anti-particle (positron, anti-proton, anti-neutron). They have even made anti-hydrogen atoms in labs.

@Karff
If I had done it that way I would not have come up with 1 which would defeat the purpose, and X ^ 0 is generally agreed to be 1 in all cases, even 0, mostly likely because it makes more sense that way (I'm no true mathematician).

@John R
Yeah, forgot that... und. = und. + und. still has the same effect.

@Messiah
I can irrefutably prove that it doesn't matter whether or not I am dreaming right now.

When I am awake, what is 2 + 2? We all know 2 + 2 = 4. When I am asleep, what is 2 + 2? It still equals 4, regardless of whether I am dreaming, I can believe that 2 + 2 = 5, but 2 + 2 = 4 regardless of what I believe. This can reasonably be extended to multiplication, division, subtraction and by extension all math as each level is built upon the previous.

Math is the same regardless of whether I am dreaming.

Now what is physics? The science that studies how the universe behaves. It establishes consistencies in the relationship of objects through the concepts of force, energy, mass, etc. Now, regardless of whether the universe is a dream or not, physics can be observed and is rooted in math which means that ultimately the physics is as real as the universe. If both are a dream then physics will only matter in the dream, and mean nothing outside the dream. However, in that dream the physics is of utmost importance as it explains a variety of phenoma within the dream. However, if we were to wake up from that dream into a world of very different physics, it wouldn't make the dream-physics less important because the dream-physics still apply in the dream.

Therefore, if we are dreaming then the physics is still important.

So ultimately, it doesn't matter if we are dreaming or not because still nobody has the power to change the rules of our universe.

"When I am awake, what is 2 + 2? We all know 2 + 2 = 4. When I am asleep, what is 2 + 2? It still equals 4, regardless of whether I am dreaming, I can believe that 2 + 2 = 5, but 2 + 2 = 4 regardless of what I believe. This can reasonably be extended to multiplication, division, subtraction and by extension all math as each level is built upon the previous.

Math is the same regardless of whether I am dreaming."


You're assuming you're conscious when you say that 2+2=4. The point is that you COULD be asleep. In the conscious world 2+2 COULD equal 5!

As silly as it sounds, it's pretty much impossible to refute. Math leads you nowhere because the math you know may be part of the dream or influenced by Descartes mad scientist.

2 + 2 = 4, no matter what.

If 2 + 2 = 5, then 4 would simply be represented by 5.

You forget that numbers are representations of values, rather than the values themselves.

A + A = B, if B represents A + A.

So if 5 represented 2 + 2 then 2 + 2 = 5.

It is impossible for 2 + 2 to be 5, unless 5 were the value which 4 represents.

If 2 + 2 = 5, then 5 + 5 = 8, or (2 + 2) + (2 + 2) = 8. In your situation, 5 is what we imagine 4 to be.

Taken further, if 1 + 1 = 2 and 2 + 2 = 5 and (1 + 1) + (1 + 1) = 4, then 4 = 5. This would mean that we have 2 numbers representing the value of 1 + 1 + 1 + 1. Which would mean 5 does not equal what we normally consider 5 to be.

If you are dreaming, then you know that you exist. Therefore, you can count how many of you that you know for a fact exist, 1... which can be represented by anything. If you know that 1 exists, then you can conceptualize how many you's would exist if 1 more of you existed, 1 + 1 which you can represent by anything and according to common practice is represented by 2, you can then conceptualize what it would be like if you existed, along with another you, another you, and another you, 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 which you can represent by anything and according to common practice is represented by 4. So the statement 2 + 2 = 4 is the same as the statement 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1. There is no way to deny this as you are in fact saying the same thing as "Myself and myself would be the same as myself and myself, which for conveniences I will represent by 2 of myself" so "2 of myself and 2 of myself would be the same as 2 of myself and 2 of myself, which for conveniences I will represent by 4 of myself"

Ah, but if.....

x = {q + [q2 + (r-p2)3]1/2}1/3 + {q - [q2 + (r-p2)3]1/2}1/3 + p

where

p = -b/(3a), q = p3 + (bc-3ad)/(6a2), r = c/(3a)

What then?

(Elephant)x(chicken)= A dead chicken with a tore up butthole. sq.

If there are anymore questions, I'll be in my library smoking my pipe.


Dirt

Arrh Stuart you made my head hurt. Do you want to assign values to your algebra for all us people who aren't the rain man. I'm assuming you created and incorrect equation.

angus, he just posted meaningless blabber

Actually Karff, no I didn't and I resent the accusation. Perhaps if you want meaningless blabber you should look at the post above this one.

Its actually a formula which has been around for around 500 years, and is instantly recognisable to anyone in the know. I just thought I would give it a shot to see if anyone here recognised it. Sadly for me, I had to memorise it when I was doing my math degree.

I see... So is there any point to it, or do maths nerds just like to compete with each other?

lol. Yes, there is a sort of point to it!