Just MORE Chatting
The Blind Eternities forum
Posted on Feb. 27, 2015, 12:54 p.m. by PreZchoICE1
fresh start. GO
Epochalyptik says... #2
For those of you who missed it in the other discussion, please post Magic-related things to the forums as appropriate. While JC is a good way to converse with a select group of users relatively quickly, we do want to foster some more active and productive discussion within the community as a whole.
April 1, 2015 2:21 a.m.
So guys look. We have a lot going on at the moment. GlistenerAgent is producing new content. I'm going heavy on the Modern League, with a lot of help from Femme_Fatale, and generally those of us within this thread are pretty close. There's a lot to like here despite all the other negativity. Why don't we all give ourselves more to look forward to instead of focusing purely on the bad. Let's produce new content and post well-reasoned and interesting threads in the forums. We lead by example.
April 1, 2015 6:59 a.m.
quesobueno123 says... #7
Same, all I have is school. Not even a league game.
April 1, 2015 7:40 a.m.
Not this one I'm afraid. Next one you can. This one has been going for a week now and I've finalised the brackets.
April 1, 2015 7:45 a.m.
Thats both not magic related and very casual right? I can still feel it in my stomach :>
April 1, 2015 8:14 a.m.
CanadianShinobi says... #14
League games must be played! I also keep putting off own contributions to the site because school is the devil. Soon I'll have my degree. So very very soon.
April 1, 2015 11:24 a.m.
The Steiner-Lehmus theorem is really cool. Still trying to get a truly direct proof for it.
April 1, 2015 1:32 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #18
I'm not always obsessed with myself, when I do I don't understand this :<
April 1, 2015 2:40 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #20
Anyway, do ya' want the mathematic proof that the sum of every natural number is equal to -1/12?
April 1, 2015 2:50 p.m.
elpokitolama - Does it do some weird thing like dividing by 0? Because that's the only way I see that happening.
April 1, 2015 2:54 p.m.
It's a troll. It only works if you redefine certain aspects of mathematics.
April 1, 2015 3:31 p.m.
Proving the sum of all natural numbers equal to -1/12 is a result of a logical fallacy. The series quite obviously diverges.
April 1, 2015 4:32 p.m.
So cal residents. We are looking for a few more peeps to help us draft a box + fat pack of DTK tonight. Trying to get 8 people. Each player will get 5 packs to construct. 5 packs in prize pool: 3 for 1st, 1 each for 2nd and third. $15 to keep what you draft and qualify for prizes. Free otherwise, you just return cards after event. Will be held in Anaheim, ca for those interested. 830pm tonight. Hit me up for more details
April 1, 2015 4:32 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #26
Damn it guys, you should have kept quiet, I was going to prove him wrong!
pout face
April 1, 2015 4:33 p.m.
Soon, I'll be able to sell my Taz for a Camry.
The day will come.
April 1, 2015 4:43 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #31
ChiefBell: it's not a troll, and the result of this demonstration is actually used in the string theory (for the 26th dimension, I'm not kidding). It can also be used to describe how works the Casimir effect :)
So, I'm going to prove that 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8...=-1/12. Without dividing by zero JWiley129, this kind of gimmick is only usable to find that 0=1. :p
First, we're going to start with the number A. A is equal to 1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1... so what you guys can think is that A is either equal to one or to zero. Let's find out!
A=1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1...
<=> A=1-(1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1...)
<=> A=1-A
<=> A=1/2 yeah, I know this part looks kinda strange. But let's remember that A is equal to 1 or 0 and it's an infinite sum: this result seems quite correct, to say.
Now, let's have some more fun with B.
B=1-2+3-4+5-6+7-8+9-10...
<=>B=1-(2-3+4-5+6-7+8-9+10-11...) the next line is going to be quite hard for the ones that do not do maths often, so if you have hard times understanding it, I recommend you to write to calcul.
<=>B=1-(1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1...)-(1-2+3-4+5-6+7-8+9-10...)
<=>B=1-A-B
<=>2B=1-1/2
<=>B=1/4
Yeah, now we're really talking. This result is now the strangest thing you've ever seen, and it is bloody right. But in a matter of seconds, it will become... The second. :D
Now, we're getting closer to the sum I was taling about before. Let's name it... S.
S=1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11...
Let's calculate S-B.
S-B=(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10...)-(1-2+3-4+5-6+7-8+9-10)...
I've got hard times to translate it to english, but we can see that the pair numbers (if pair isn't the right term in english then the number that can be divised by two) are getting multiplied by two, and the non-pair ones are vanishing. (1-1=0;2-(-2)=4;(3-3)=0...)
<=> S-B=(4+8+12+16+20+24+48)... and here it comes.
<=> S-B=4S
<=> S-4S=B
<=> -3S=1/4
<=> S=-1/12
(greet the public)
April 1, 2015 4:44 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #32
The following describe the feelings a normal human being can feel after this demonstration:
The choc. "It can't be true!"
The denial. "He made a mistake, I don't know where but he did and therefore it isn't true!"
The anger. You haven't found the "mistake" that made it possible.
The acceptation. Go around and show this mathematical proof to your friends for them to freak out :D
April 1, 2015 5:03 p.m.
So the fallacy with your logic is that A and B don't have a value because both sums diverge. Tricky tricky.
April 1, 2015 5:08 p.m.
GoldGhost012 says... #35
Fuck your math! I don't want to look and see math while I'm putting off my Calculus II homework!
April 1, 2015 5:11 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #36
JWiley129 the fact is we're trying to quantify the unquantifiable and while doing this these are the ones and only values that stick. That's why it is used in physics, but never in mathematics. You're in the step two :D
April 1, 2015 5:11 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #37
If you want all why it works, just ask me and I'll give it to you... tomorrow. Have to go to sleep, now.
April 1, 2015 5:17 p.m.
You don't understand, I'm a math teacher, I know all the tricks. I'll go into more detail when in not on my phone.
April 1, 2015 5:19 p.m.
I'm in the same boat GoldGhost012. I didn't expect this level if terror here
April 1, 2015 5:25 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #41
All you want to know is here, but I have yet to translate it. One of my maths teachers showed me how to do this last year, but yet I had to find why it worked. But the demonstration of why it was right was far beyond my capacities. So I found someone that explained it well but yeah, it's in french so you might have trouble reading it (sauf si tu es toi aussi francais, bien sur .).
April 1, 2015 5:25 p.m.
Yo JWiley129 what do you teach?
And, by the way elpokitolama, quantifying something that is not quantifiable makes no sense to begin with. Your first series, A (the Grandi's series, if I may call it by its appropriate name), can be made to equal 0 or 1 (depending on ordering). Only its Cesaro sum is 1/2, and it's pretty easy to show. However, this is not a traditional "sum" and thus can't really be used in accordance with other infinite series if you're dealing with math like you were. The little trick with B was quite clever though.
April 1, 2015 5:31 p.m.
It's wrong for two reasons:
The first is as JWiley129 mentioned. You can't sum divergent series' definitively.
Secondly you're using the equal sign to denote a mathematical relationship, you're not using the equal sign to mean 'this is exactly equal to this'. All you've proven is that there's a relationship between the series and -1/12.
Sorry, my brothers like a mathematical savant.
April 1, 2015 5:32 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #44
bigguy99 you found out! The truth is that I do not use exactly a sum. And you're right when you mention the Cesaro sum, because it is the root of the justification-which is the utilisation of a sum generalized to divergent series. But I'm really too damn tired to describe it correctly in english for now. Tomorrow guys, tomorrow!
Forgot to say it, but there's also another demonstration (which use physics, this time). Maybe it will come out with the complete proof. :p
April 1, 2015 5:39 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #45
I'm not sure you translated that entirely correctly... but the fact of the matter is I'm waaaaaaay too lazy to go ahead and translate all of it and compare it the one you came up with. So I'll just go with the assumption that, since you live in Paris, your translation is accurate (logical, ain't it).
Also, I have not learned that level of math yet, so that's all serbo-croatian to me...
April 1, 2015 5:51 p.m.
elpokitolama says... #46
FAMOUSWATERMELON actually, I didn't translate anything for now. I just made the first part of the demonstration (that's why I said tomorrowwwww for the rest).
If I do understand how it works, I'm still unable to manipulate mathematical objects of this level at my whim. Also, please don't take each of my expressions too literally. English isn't my first language. x)
April 1, 2015 6 p.m.
Guys, I'm really shit at magic. Like, totally. For proof - check the league results (linked to on my profile)
April 1, 2015 6:02 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON it's just infinite sums. The Cesaro sum is a more advanced thing but the basics of them (whether they converge or diverge, radius of convergence, etc.) are high-school calculus topics. Infinite products are a lot more fun. They're much more difficult to work with.
April 1, 2015 6:02 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #49
Well you must have translated somehow, in your mind, because that's french and we're currently speaking english :)
April 1, 2015 6:04 p.m.
CommanderOfBolas says... #50
I feel as though I have a lesser mind. Like a red mage, I seem to only be able to count to 20.
Jk. Just had to insult mono red mages for a moment. Very interesting stuff, though. Makes me glad I am a history major. Math has always been one of my better subjects, but I never continued up to calculus. I stopped at trigonometry and statistics because I wanted to focus on areas that need more improvement, such as my writing skills
GoldGhost012 says... #1
Hopefully the site's done enough exploding recently to take it easy for a bit.
April 1, 2015 1:50 a.m.