• Tja@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The proof is something like 300+ pages long and they needed to invent a few new branches of mathematics to reach the end, because it’s strictly not based on appeal to authority. I didn’t even try to understand it, but it’s a cool piece of trivia.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It’s a basic property of counting though, right?

      I mean I understand that there are academic standards of proof, but the idea that those are necessary for casual conversations about easily understood concepts is pretty ridiculous.

      It seems like one of those bojack memes where the drooling person at the one end and the Jedi at the other end would both say just count a couple of rocks and the nerd in between would be saying write a 300-page proof.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Things like basic property of counting are not mathematical strict definitions.

        Relying on “dude, it’s obvious” doesn’t work in science, you need to prove things. Otherwise you’d think a feather and a cannonball always fall a different speeds, for instance.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Mathematics isn’t an empirical science.

          And you’re trying to prove that mathematics works the same way as physics weirdly with regards to proof? It doesn’t. You do proofs in precalculus and none of them involve dropping cannonballs and feathers from the ceiling.

          But again, we’re not talking about an environment where formal proofs are necessary. This is social media, we’re a link under cat photos.

              • Tja@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                For something so sensitive, I like to have it. I won’t accept any broad generalization unless backed by a reputable study.

                • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 hours ago

                  You’re kinda sensitive about everything. You want a 300-page thesis before acknowledging that 1+1=2.

                  Which it’s kinda funny, this whole thing has been an aside but like…you said you tried to read it and didn’t really understand it. Is that really what you need to have a casual conversation about something? A proof, study, or document too long or complicated for you to be able to prove it’s wrong?

                  • Tja@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    I don’t want it, I said that it exists and it was needed because science it’s an exact thing that requires proofs, experiments and data. What I want is any data that shows that Zionism causes a rise in Antisemitism, because I haven’t seen any change. I only got “trust me bro” so far.

                    I also use electricity without knowing how a nuclear reactor works, if you want to criticize that.