"Choosing to Believe" 2 + 2 = 5: The Interviews

This subject came up when certain theists claimed that belief is a choice. That seems to be a common belief among Christians. It of course relates to whether a person can actually choose to believe in God. A few people here claimed that they have chosen to believe that 2 + 2 = 5, and two of them said they did it while having a dialogue with me. They told me that after the supposed fact, so I never got to talk to them while they were in that claimed state of mind. So I challenge anybody to make a choice to in total honesty believe that 2 + 2 = 5 and answer questions for people in this thread. Interviewing people while in a state of chosen belief of an absurd mathematical statement should be very interesting and educational. Set the record straight and let us talk to you while you are in this state of 2 + 2 = 5 consciousness. Who can do it?

This ought to be interesting. :chuckle:

I'll start:

"(2785/27.983)^2" equals what?

Get me two rocks, get me two more, and put them in a pile. Now count them.

If one of the rocks break, you'll have 5 rocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

If one of the rocks break, you'll have 5 rocks.

---

But I'll still have the same amount of rocks in my pile, cracked into pieces or not. Just different fractions.

You'll have the same weight of rocks. But you'll have more rocks now, thats pretty obvious. You forgot to define 'rock'. Anything can be a rock, how can you tell the difference between a rock and a fraction? Isn't a rock actually already a fraction of a bigger rock?

Another example: Put 2 women together with 2 men and you'll end up with 5 people after a long enough time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

You'll have the same weight of rocks. But you'll have more rocks now, thats pretty obvious. You forgot to define 'rock'. Anything can be a rock, how can you tell the difference between a rock and a fraction? Isn't a rock actually already a fraction of a bigger rock?

Another example: Put 2 women together with 2 men and you'll end up with 5 people after a long enough time.

---

Troll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korittke

Troll

---

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86...u_win_inet.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86...u_win_inet.jpg

---

I don't get it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

You'll have the same weight of rocks. But you'll have more rocks now, thats pretty obvious. You forgot to define 'rock'. Anything can be a rock, how can you tell the difference between a rock and a fraction? Isn't a rock actually already a fraction of a bigger rock?

---

What? If I have the same weight of rocks, then I have the same amount of rocks. How it is distributed in that pile doesn't matter. I won't have "more" of anything.

Quote:

---

Another example: Put 2 women together with 2 men and you'll end up with 5 people after a long enough time.

---

No you won't, unless you add something else into the equation; that being food and water. That woman isn't going to have the energy to conceive that child, and even if she does, he's going to die right off the bat unless he gets some food and water.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psychology student

I don't get it?

---

Neither do I

Quote:

---

No you won't, unless you add something else into the equation; that being food and water. That woman isn't going to have the energy to conceive that child, and even if she does, he's going to die right off the bat unless he gets some food and water.

---

Unless it was a lucid dream, then food, water and time wouldn't be a factor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Unless it was a lucid dream, then food, water and time wouldn't be a factor.

---

What.

Just think about it. If I can't give you the answer, you'll have to find it yourself. Sorry, I'm gonna stop replying to this discussion. It's going nowhere. Just think about what I said, alright? :)

Everythings possible in a lucid dream. How about you think about that? It's perfectly possible in a lucid dream to put 2 rocks together with 2 rocks and end up with 5 rocks. Or put 2 women together with 2 men and end up with 5 people. Just think about it, alright? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Everythings possible in a lucid dream. How about you think about that? It's perfectly possible in a lucid dream to put 2 rocks together with 2 rocks and end up with 5 rocks. Or put 2 women together with 2 men and end up with 5 people. Just think about it, alright? :)

---

I notice you have not taken me up on the challenge yet.

For crying out loud.

- The rocks are ultra duper solid and won't break.
- We're talking about real life, not lucid dreams.
- My question hasn't been answered yet.

Real life is a dream. You just haven't realized yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Real life is a dream. You just haven't realized yet.

---

Are you going to do this, or are you not? My guess is that you are not. I am talking about an actual belief that 2 + 2 = 5, not some silly game play about taking four things, splitting something in half, and making a fifth thing. Also, I don't think you can have this conversation with us while in a lucid dream state. I don't think you can choose to believe specific absurd math while in that state any way.

If you are not going to do the challenge, say that. You are wasting thread space.

After all of the people who have posted in this forum that belief is a choice, why is nobody taking on this challenge?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Real life is a dream. You just haven't realized yet.

---

Imagine this thread away then. :roll:


I don't care if you think waking life is a dream or not, just know that the questions are to be answered while awake.

2 plus 2 needs to be 5. Math is an abstract concept. Many things are unknown in the universe, and it is completly possible that we can come up with a formula in which 2 plus 2 equals 5.

2 + 2 - 1 * 17 / 4 :: 54(56^5% 13X) =; 5

or

2 + 2 = 5

Which is much like:

a = 1

a = b²

a² + b² = b² - 2a²

4ab³ - 2ab² = 4ab² - 48

thus

a = 3

thus

2 = 3

thus

Communism is proven.

Who wants to give the first interview?

belief is a choice

you can choose to believe what ever you want. asking people if they are willing to believe 2 + 2 = 5 to prove this statement is silly, as most people are not going to willingly believe something they see as illogical

just look at fundamentalism. they think the earth is 6000 years old. is that not illogical to the rest of us?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

belief is a choice

you can choose to believe what ever you want. asking people if they are willing to believe 2 + 2 = 5 to prove this statement is silly, as most people are not going to willingly believe something they see as illogical

just look at fundamentalism. they think the earth is 6000 years old. is that not illogical to the rest of us?

---

You wouldn't choose to believe something you think is illogical (if you could) for a few minutes so you can show atheists that belief is a choice? If belief is a choice, we need to know. Just asserting that belief is a choice is not convincing.

Besides, don't you claim people can choose to stop thinking that something illogical is illogical?

Who wants to do the first interview?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

2 plus 2 needs to be 5. Math is an abstract concept. Many things are unknown in the universe, and it is completly possible that we can come up with a formula in which 2 plus 2 equals 5.

---

Math is completely unchangable. The only reason 2+2=4 is because 2= half of four. By definition. You'd have to be dealign with different amounts to get an answer of 5. Look. I just made up a language where 3 has a value of 6 and 4 has a value of 20. Thusly, 3+4=26. Only because of technicalities of what you call the value that is represented by the symbol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Bennington

Math is completely unchangable. The only reason 2+2=4 is because 2= half of four. By definition. You'd have to be dealign with different amounts to get an answer of 5. Look. I just made up a language where 3 has a value of 6 and 4 has a value of 20. Thusly, 3+4=26. Only because of technicalities of what you call the value that is represented by the symbol.

---

This man explained it much better than I did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

You wouldn't choose to believe something you think is illogical (if you could) for a few minutes so you can show atheists that belief is a choice? If belief is a choice, we need to know. Just asserting that belief is a choice is not convincing.

Besides, don't you claim people can choose to stop thinking that something illogical is illogical?

Who wants to do the first interview?

---

how can I temporary choose to believe in something, that I don't really believe in? I would not be believing. only PRETENDING.

you are taking the words so literally like a child just for the sake of arguing.

it is not the choice that creates the belief. NO ONE SAID THIS. saying you choose to believe something does not mean: A creates B. It means, the action of A must happen before the product of B.

it means, you can not believe in something unless you have chosen to believe in something. NOT that choice creates the belief.

I hope you never go to court and should ever have to testify, should you twist words around their meaning, piss the judge off and wind up in jail. why does the notion of belief being a choice piss you off so much?

I feel the issue is your lack of understanding of choice, and belief. Belief is HUGE. It makes up your whole WORLD. I mean, if we believed gravity stopped working we would jump out of our windows and kill ourselves. Belief then is pretty solid

Choice is not a thought.

You can not 'think' to choose to believe in something. You can not 'think' to choose to believe that 2 + 2 = 5. We don't think "I choose to believe in God" "I choose to not believe in God" before whether or not we do. No voice in your head was necessary when you made this choice. That choice, more than likely first started out as a feeling.

Choice is not the things you say. You can not SAY "I choose to believe in something illogical therefore I do". Does saying make you really choose to believe? No.

What is choice then, in relation to belief?

Not just saying words.

Not just pretending.

Not just a thought.

It is action of your entire consciousness and emotions. And if just one tiny part of your consciousness is against what ever it is you are choosing to believe in - whether it is your heart or logic - then there is doubt. Which can surface itself as ANGER, if people make you question that which you have chosen to believe in.

You choose to believe in gravity, because every part of your consciousness and being, right down to your toes tell you its true. The same is NOT true for every factual belief. Tell kids every where Santa Claus is based off a saint who is dead, and they'll call you a liar.

Did they choose to believe in Santa. Yes they bloody did. How do I know. Because I NEVER BELIEVED IN SANTA, I CHOOSE NOT TO. Shocking I know. But kids do choose to believe in fairy tales or not. And they choose when they stop believing.

Believe it or not, there are people who don't believe in gravity. And they have chosen to believe in this, for a reason that is beyond our reasoning. But I guarantee you, its a choice.

Why is it important to understand belief is a choice? You are responsible for the choices you make, you are responsible for the things you believe in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

how can I temporary choose to believe in something, that I don't really believe in? I would not be believing. only PRETENDING.

---

BINGO!!! EXACTLY MY POINT!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

you are taking the words so literally like a child just for the sake of arguing.

it is not the choice that creates the belief. NO ONE SAID THIS. saying you choose to believe something does not mean: A creates B. It means, the action of A must happen before the product of B.

it means, you can not believe in something unless you have chosen to believe in something. NOT that choice creates the belief.

---

Then explain what it means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

I hope you never go to court and should ever have to testify, should you twist words around their meaning, piss the judge off and wind up in jail. why does the notion of belief being a choice piss you off so much?

I feel the issue is your lack of understanding of choice, and belief. Belief is HUGE. It makes up your whole WORLD. I mean, if we believed gravity stopped working we would jump out of our windows and kill ourselves. Belief then is pretty solid

Choice is not a thought.

You can not 'think' to choose to believe in something. You can not 'think' to choose to believe that 2 + 2 = 5. We don't think "I choose to believe in God" "I choose to not believe in God" before whether or not we do. No voice in your head was necessary when you made this choice. That choice, more than likely first started out as a feeling.

Choice is not the things you say. You can not SAY "I choose to believe in something illogical therefore I do". Does saying make you really choose to believe? No.

What is choice then, in relation to belief?

Not just saying words.

Not just pretending.

Not just a thought.

It is action of your entire consciousness and emotions. And if just one tiny part of your consciousness is against what ever it is you are choosing to believe in - whether it is your heart or logic - then there is doubt. Which can surface itself as ANGER, if people make you question that which you have chosen to believe in.

You choose to believe in gravity, because every part of your consciousness and being, right down to your toes tell you its true. The same is NOT true for every factual belief. Tell kids every where Santa Claus is based off a saint who is dead, and they'll call you a liar.

Did they choose to believe in Santa. Yes they bloody did. How do I know. Because I NEVER BELIEVED IN SANTA, I CHOOSE NOT TO. Shocking I know. But kids do choose to believe in fairy tales or not. And they choose when they stop believing.

Believe it or not, there are people who don't believe in gravity. And they have chosen to believe in this, for a reason that is beyond our reasoning. But I guarantee you, its a choice.

Why is it important to understand belief is a choice? You are responsible for the choices you make, you are responsible for the things you believe in.

---

None of that explains how belief is a choice. You said it is not a choice, then you said it is, then you refrained from explaining how it is. You are not making sense.

How is belief a choice? I know it is a state of mind that follows from thoughts and sometimes emotions, but how is it a choice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

BINGO!!! EXACTLY MY POINT!!!!!!



Then explain what it means.



None of that explains how belief is a choice. You said it is not a choice, then you said it is, then you refrained from explaining how it is. You are not making sense.

How is belief a choice? I know it is a state of mind that follows from thoughts and sometimes emotions, but how is it a choice?

---

But 2+2=5 is impossible. What are you relating it too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

"(2785/27.983)^2" equals what?

---

bump...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

But 2+2=5 is impossible. What are you relating it too?

---

The fact that you can't believe 2 + 2 = 4 and choose to believe 2 + 2 = 5. Are you serious?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The fact that you can't believe 2 + 2 = 4 and choose to believe 2 + 2 = 5. Are you serious?

---

Oh my God.. If you are relating this to religion you are completely wrong. I was hoping you weren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

Oh my God.. If you are relating this to religion you are completely wrong. I was hoping you weren't.

---

Why? A lot of people here claim religious belief is a choice. What do you think about that?


Who wants to do the first interview?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

Oh my God.. If you are relating this to religion you are completely wrong. I was hoping you weren't.

---

How? How can you choose to believe in something?

You can't.
Choice requires motivation, and motivation requires belief, or a disregard for truth (combined with rewards for making this particular choice).

This thread both fails and wins because it's never going to make any progress at all.

Watching this thread go to waste is...'pointless'.

I accept in choosing to believe that 2 + 2 = 5, whenever I view this thread.

Fire your questions away; I haven't pre-meditated any answers, so whatever spews out does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClouD

Watching this thread go to waste is...'pointless'.

I accept in choosing to believe that 2 + 2 = 5, whenever I view this thread.

Fire your questions away; I haven't pre-meditated any answers, so whatever spews out does.

---

What's 1+1?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korittke

This thread both fails and wins because it's never going to make any progress at all.

---

Agreed, It's impossible to argue with someone that he can choose his believes, if that person chooses to believe he can't. But at the same time, by disagreeing with me, he proves my point. But then theres still the ego whos in the way of the intelligence. If you have chosen to believe something all your life, its a big hit for your ego if someone tells you the opposite, wether it's true or false, the first reaction will be denial.

On top of that, this topic doesn't make any sense.
Because 2+2=5 is false in the system of believs of maths, you conclude that it is impossible to choose your believes? lol

I can choose to believe in a new system of maths I created myself, where the symbol for four is 5, and the symbol for five is 4. And therefor show that I can't only choose what I believe in, but I can also create my own system of believes. This is btw, how maths orignated, thats how the number-symbols orignated. Creations of the human mind.

Also, the fact that we are having an argument wether you can choose your believes or not, is a proof that you can indeed choose your believes, or we wouldn't be having this argument.

But yeah, I just keep repeating myself. In the end it boils down wether you choose to believe you have free will, or wether you choose to believe you don't. I choose to believe I do have free will. I don't believe in determinism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClouD

Watching this thread go to waste is...'pointless'.

I accept in choosing to believe that 2 + 2 = 5, whenever I view this thread.

Fire your questions away; I haven't pre-meditated any answers, so whatever spews out does.

---

Thanks! It looks like Chaybachayba and Really don't want to participate in this examination of chosen belief, so I am glad you will. Chaybachayba just wants to assert that she can do it and not be tested. Okay, look at the $'s below.
____
$ $

$ $
____

1. How many $'s are in the group between the lines?

2. How many are in the top row?

3. How many are in the bottom row?

4. What is the sum of your answers to questions 2 and 3?

Finally you ask a question, it took you long enough.

1. four

2. two

3. two

4. two + two = four

I choose to believe the symbol for four is 5
I choose to believe the symbol for two is 2
I choose to believe the symbol for adding is +
I choose to believe the symbol for equation is =

So, I believe 2 + 2 = 5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

I choose to believe the symbol for four is 5
I choose to believe the symbol for two is 2
I choose to believe the symbol for adding is +
I choose to believe the symbol for equation is =

---

Holy shit. The point was to believe that 2+2=5, not changing symbols around so that 2+2=4.

Troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Finally you ask a question, it took you long enough.

1. four

2. two

3. two

4. two + two = four

I choose to believe the symbol for four is 5
I choose to believe the symbol for two is 2
I choose to believe the symbol for adding is +
I choose to believe the symbol for equation is =

So, I believe 2 + 2 = 5

---

Please answer in the generally accepted mathematical language of English speakers and not your own. Your dodgy language changing is not helping us get to the bottom of whether belief is a choice. All you have done is show that you can make up your own language.

Lol, whatever my answer is, you'll just say it's not an answer.

How can you test wether I believe 2+2=5? You can't. Therefor, I win by default.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Lol, whatever my answer is, you'll just say it's not an answer.

How can you test wether I believe 2+2=5? You can't. Therefor, I win by default.

---

http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/ASC1216.jpg
Seattle Troll Statue

You're being the troll ignoring every single answer I give you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

You're being the troll ignoring every single answer I give you.

---

Let me know if you ever end up actually having an answer. Until then, you are just engaging in typical lame trolling.

If you want to believe I'm a troll, thats your choice. Nothing I can do about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

If you want to believe I'm a troll, thats your choice. Nothing I can do about it.

---

Can someone please send a set of ropes to this guy so he can hang himself like the proper tool he is.

Another impressive argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Another impressive argument.

---

Another impressive argument.

With all the ignoring questions or giving dodgy answers, ChaybaChayba can be counted as fail.

I'll post for the third time my question, but this time directed at Cloud:

Quote:

---

"(2785/27.983)^2" equals what?

---

What is the correct answer then? Every answer I give is false.

The question is "Can you choose to believe 2+2=5".
The only possible answers are "Yes or No".
My answer is "Yes".

How is that dodgy? Tbh, you won't be satisfied until I say "No" . You dont' care for discussion, you just care to win. But you can't force me what to believe in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Why? A lot of people here claim religious belief is a choice. What do you think about that?


Who wants to do the first interview?

---

There are many times when a person reconsiders his faith, he doesn't believe in God anymore, etc. Also I'm religious by choice, I have no idea what you are talking about. You wake up in the morning and choose whether or not you don't want to go to church. If you are talking about fundies, this post still doesn't make sense. It is impossible that 2+2=5 in simple math. But it is not impossible there is a God..

Also how did Atheists converts arise if religious people didn't have a choice? They chose Atheism over religion..

I think you already know a good sum of Christians in this world who take religion as a philosophy, the way it should be, and philosophy is a science without proof or evidence..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

What is the correct answer then? Every answer I give is false.

The question is "Can you choose to believe 2+2=5".
The only possible answers are "Yes or No".
My answer is "Yes".

How is that dodgy? Tbh, you won't be satisfied until I say "No" . You dont' care for discussion, you just care to win. But you can't force me what to believe in.

---

The thing is, you ignore the questions most of the time. When you don't ignore them, you give dodgy answers like "If I change the meaning of the symbols...", "If I'm in a lucid dream...", etc.

The logical conclusion is that you're either lying or highly delusional about your belief-choosing abilities.


Dreamworld tell me, do you choose your beliefs, or do you make your choices based on your beliefs?

No Atheist in here thought "Hey, it would be cool if I were an Atheist, think I'll change my beliefs". Talking for myself at least: I started thinking, and reached this conclusion not based on choice but based on logic and reason.

The purpose of this thread isn't to answer a yes/no question like "Can you choose your beliefs?", it's to answer questions with the intent of verifying that claim you made in an earlier thread. (like my yet unanswered simple maths question)

I don't choose to believe you're a liar, but what I see in your posts compels to think so. It's not my choice.


#edit#

I see ChaybaChayba deleted his post, so here's what I was answering to:

Quote:

---

How the hell is "Yes." Dodgy?

Theres no point in this thread at all. Because you choose to believe whatever you want to believe. Even if I answer "Yes." you choose to believe I'm a liar.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

There are many times when a person reconsiders his faith, he doesn't believe in God anymore, etc. Also I'm religious by choice, I have no idea what you are talking about. You wake up in the morning and choose whether or not you don't want to go to church. If you are talking about fundies, this post still doesn't make sense. It is impossible that 2+2=5 in simple math. But it is not impossible there is a God..

---

I can't make sense of the idea that God exists. How do I choose to believe in God? The existence of any god in general does not seem 100% impossible, but the existence of the Judeo-Christian God does seem impossible. The existence of any god in general seems far fetched, and I do not have enough reason to believe in it. So how could I choose to believe in God? Just like that mathematical falsehood you said you know is false and therefore cannot believe in, I know God is a falsehood and believe gods are a falsehood.


If anybody wants to try deliberately believing that 2 + 2 = 5 and answering this, please do. I am of course talking about answering what I am actually asking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Okay, look at the $'s below.
____
$ $

$ $
____

1. How many $'s are in the group between the lines?

2. How many are in the top row?

3. How many are in the bottom row?

4. What is the sum of your answers to questions 2 and 3?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

I see ChaybaChayba deleted his post, so here's what I was answering to:

---

Chaybachayba is a troll. There is no point in talking to her. She is just a kid lashing out at life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Chaybachayba is a troll. There is no point in talking to her. She is just a kid lashing out at life.

---

This means that all this times my insults were in the wrong gender. NOOOO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Thanks! It looks like Chaybachayba and Really don't want to participate in this examination of chosen belief, so I am glad you will. Chaybachayba just wants to assert that she can do it and not be tested. Okay, look at the $'s below.
____
$ $

$ $
____

1. How many $'s are in the group between the lines?

2. How many are in the top row?

3. How many are in the bottom row?

4. What is the sum of your answers to questions 2 and 3?

---

Okay, I'm going to go on the assumption here that I fully believe that 2 + 2 = 5, and I will answer and defend with every piece of possibility that supports or does not cause a paradox in my saying that I support this belief.
That meaning that in my mind, using my logic, 2 + 2 = 5. This will attempted to be incorporated into everything 'I' believe in this thread.
_____

I see a possibility in which I can defend a pre-supposed strike against my belief of 2 + 2 = 5 - that the value of the divided unit is everchanging and indefinite.

In this opening up a weakness in the logical aspect of 2 + 2 = 5, I'd say that all values are everchanging, thus that any value of any unit is flux.
_____

Reiterating something here - within these posts is the belief that 2 + 2 = 5, and in saying that I will try to use whatever I can to support so, as long as it doesn't contradict.

But are you actually believing that 2+2=5, or just pretending to do so?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

But are you actually believing that 2+2=5, or just pretending to do so?

---

Within this thread, I am believing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClouD

Okay, I'm going to go on the assumption here that I fully believe that 2 + 2 = 5 (...)

---

Here you seem to imply otherwise.

I was setting context and clarifying my intention. My beliefs external of this thread are irrelevant.

I wasn't talking about you're outside beliefs.

Anyway, would you please care to answer my question then? (post #51)

Quote:

---

"(2785/27.983)^2" equals what?

---

If you read my answer to UM, then assuming you aren't retarded (setting context and clarifying), I await a retort that addresses that.
_____

Quote:

---

I see a possibility in which I can defend a pre-supposed strike against my belief of 2 + 2 = 5 - that the value of the divided unit is everchanging and indefinite.

In this opening up a weakness in the logical aspect of 2 + 2 = 5, I'd say that all values are everchanging, thus that any value of any unit is flux.

---

The answer is everchanging in this context, as is the question.
_____

Also as a reminder, this is a theoretical exercise. Try not to change circumstance and context.

In normal logic, (2785/27.983)^2 = 9905.168185617


If 2+2=5...

4 = 5
9905.168185617 = x

x=(9905.168185617*5)/4
x=12381.460232021

I think this answer is correct, and belief in 2+2=5 wasn't even needed to reach it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

In normal logic, (2785/27.983)^2 = 9905.168185617


If 2+2=5...

4 = 5
9905.168185617 = x

x=(9905.168185617*5)/4
x=12381.460232021

I think this answer is correct, and belief in 2+2=5 wasn't even needed to reach it.

---

Brainfreeze!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedfishBluefish

You can't.
Choice requires motivation, and motivation requires belief, or a disregard for truth (combined with rewards for making this particular choice).

---

It was a rhetorical question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClouD

Okay, I'm going to go on the assumption here that I fully believe that 2 + 2 = 5, and I will answer and defend with every piece of possibility that supports or does not cause a paradox in my saying that I support this belief.
That meaning that in my mind, using my logic, 2 + 2 = 5. This will attempted to be incorporated into everything 'I' believe in this thread.
_____

I see a possibility in which I can defend a pre-supposed strike against my belief of 2 + 2 = 5 - that the value of the divided unit is everchanging and indefinite.

In this opening up a weakness in the logical aspect of 2 + 2 = 5, I'd say that all values are everchanging, thus that any value of any unit is flux.
_____

Reiterating something here - within these posts is the belief that 2 + 2 = 5, and in saying that I will try to use whatever I can to support so, as long as it doesn't contradict.

---

Remember that I am talking about believing in total honesty that 2 + 2 = 5, not just being a lawyer who represents that side of the argument.

What you said argues that 2 + 2 = different things and that the value is constantly changing, but not that it = specifically 5.

Quote:

---

In normal logic, (2785/27.983)^2 = 9905.168185617

If 2+2=5
4 = 5

9905.168185617 = x

x=(9905.168185617*5)/4
x=12381.460232021

I think this answer is correct, and belief in 2+2=5 wasn't even needed to reach it.

---

What the hell is that? :|

Anyway, uh, some pretty retarded conversations going on here. 2+2=4. Look it up.

Although it is possible to glue a stick measured to be 2 metres to another stick measured to be 2 metres and get a stick which measures 5 metres.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

If one of the rocks break, you'll have 5 rocks.

---

Right, because 1 divided by two equals two.

That's what you said, but this is what you should have said:

One divided by two equals two halves.

Think about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Everythings possible in a lucid dream. How about you think about that? It's perfectly possible in a lucid dream to put 2 rocks together with 2 rocks and end up with 5 rocks.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Real life is a dream. You just haven't realized yet.

---

Ah, good. Since you've become lucid in this dream called reality, please go ahead and add two rocks to two rocks and end up with five.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

Oh my God.. If you are relating this to religion you are completely wrong. I was hoping you weren't.

---

Not exactly. You seem to be seeing this as UM saying "Religious belief is tantamount to believing 2+2=5". Maybe UM does think that, but that isn't the point. The point here is to demonstrate that a person cannot choose to believe something they understand is not true. At best you can choose to reexamine the grounds on which you believe it to be true to find a flaw in those reasons. You can't just automatically switch between them. It doesn't happen. The next best thing is thinking hypothetically, but this is literally pretending you believe that it's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

If you want to believe I'm a troll, thats your choice.

---

LOL nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

What the hell is that? :|

---

I don't know the name for the "rule" in English, but it's simple proportionality maths learned at the 6th grade or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Remember that I am talking about believing in total honesty that 2 + 2 = 5, not just being a lawyer who represents that side of the argument.

What you said argues that 2 + 2 = different things and that the value is constantly changing, but not that it = specifically 5.

---

_____

"It" (being 2 + 2), is everchanging too.
x + x = x
_____

I have not been illogical. Saying that 2 is definite, 5 is definite, + and = are definite and that all their meanings are definite, then the outcome will be definite.

In other words, you are asking me to believe in 2 + 2 = 5, yet telling me that 2 + 2 = 4. This is illogical.

There was one logical way to defend against the incoming strike - to say that at least one or more of the symbols/numbers are indefinite.

I found that it made most logic for all the symbols and numbers are indefinite.

If 2 does not equal '2', 5 does not equal '5', + and = don't equal '+' and '=', then 2 + 2 = 5.

If you were to say that the symbols are definite, then fine.
2 'plus' 2 'equals' 5.

Quote:

---

but it's simple proportionality maths learned at the 6th grade or something.

---

It makes no sense at all. What's it supposed to show?

If 4 equals 5, then 9905.168185617 equals 12381.460232021.

That's answering the question I threw earlier to those you claim to be able to believe 2+2=5. (in case you haven't read the whole thread...)

If 4 equals 5 then any number could be anything if you extend your argument, then. For example,

e = e * 4/5 = e * 5/4 = e * 4^2/5^2 = e * 5^2/4^2 = e * 4^3/5^3 = e * 5^3/4^3

etcetera. If 4 equals 5, then it follows that any number you choose can actually take any range of values from 0 to infinity. Which is ridiculous and meaningless, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

What is the correct answer then? Every answer I give is false.

The question is "Can you choose to believe 2+2=5".
The only possible answers are "Yes or No".
My answer is "Yes".

How is that dodgy? Tbh, you won't be satisfied until I say "No" . You dont' care for discussion, you just care to win. But you can't force me what to believe in.

---

You have two tables. On one there are four apples and on the other there are five.
Graphical representation:

| O O | O O O
| O O | O O


An evil person tells you to chose the table where there are 5 apples. If you chose correctly you live, otherwise you die.

Are you seriosuly going to say that if this was a real situation and that if you chose to believe that 2+2=5 before you got there, you would actually chose table #1?

Can you chose to believe something in a second and then blow yourself up for Allah? Personaly I think you're joking/trolling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClouD

_____

"It" (being 2 + 2), is everchanging too.
x + x = x
_____

I have not been illogical. Saying that 2 is definite, 5 is definite, + and = are definite and that all their meanings are definite, then the outcome will be definite.

In other words, you are asking me to believe in 2 + 2 = 5, yet telling me that 2 + 2 = 4. This is illogical.

There was one logical way to defend against the incoming strike - to say that at least one or more of the symbols/numbers are indefinite.

I found that it made most logic for all the symbols and numbers are indefinite.

If 2 does not equal '2', 5 does not equal '5', + and = don't equal '+' and '=', then 2 + 2 = 5.

If you were to say that the symbols are definite, then fine.
2 'plus' 2 'equals' 5.

---

Yes or no: When writing that, did you HONESTLY believe that 2 + 2 = 5?

You keep suggesting that you are playing lawyer for the argument. That is not what this challenge is about. I am talking about REALLY believing that 2 + 2 = 5. Is that the case with you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonsay

Personaly I think you're joking/trolling.

---

Yes, ChaybaChayba is just another troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

If 4 equals 5 then any number could be anything if you extend your argument, then. For example,

e = e * 4/5 = e * 5/4 = e * 4^2/5^2 = e * 5^2/4^2 = e * 4^3/5^3 = e * 5^3/4^3

etcetera. If 4 equals 5, then it follows that any number you choose can actually take any range of values from 0 to infinity. Which is ridiculous and meaningless, of course.

---

I assumed not all logic was discarded while taking the 2+2=5 belief, keeping proportionality in the numbers. (4=5, 2=2.5, 8=10, etc)

The point is, can anyone actually believe that two coke cans when set next to two more coke cans will equal five coke cans. If they know what four coke cans means. Or rather, can they choose to believe such. If you actually believed this and you were a good person, or a greedy person, then you would continously put them next to eachother to get that fifth coke can and sell/give it away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandform

The point is, can anyone actually believe that two coke cans when set next to two more coke cans will equal five coke cans. If they know what four coke cans means. Or rather, can they choose to believe such.

---

I can't think why they would choose to believe that. 2+2=4. Frankly I don't see how this thread has gotten so big trying to make math into some philosophical discussion thing, with 5 being a symbol for 4 and shit like that, jeez, no matter what the symbol is, 4 is 4!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

I can't think why they would choose to believe that. 2+2=4. Frankly I don't see how this thread has gotten so big trying to make math into some philosophical discussion thing, with 5 being a symbol for 4 and shit like that, jeez, no matter what the symbol is, 4 is 4!

---

Exactly, this whole thread was in resposne to Chayba saying that a person can choose to believe anything. That one could "choose" to believe in such and such religion regardless of their own logic, which is just incorrect.

...it's definitley not as simple as choice...it's ruled by inherent knowledge about the world...taking this 2+2=4 example, we inherently know that 2 objects plus another 2 objects makes 4 objects...how do you argue that?

Sorry if I'm repeating stuff already said, I find myself unable to read this thread in its entirety.

Who wants to do the first interview?

:rolllaugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Who wants to do the first interview?

:rolllaugh:

---

I would fail cause I believe 2 + 2 = 4

OMG lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandform

I would fail cause I believe 2 + 2 = 4

---

You and EVERYBODY ELSE. :lol:

Makes me wonder how this thread got to four pages from debate on the subject...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

...it's definitley not as simple as choice...it's ruled by inherent knowledge about the world...taking this 2+2=4 example, we inherently know that 2 objects plus another 2 objects makes 4 objects...how do you argue that?

Sorry if I'm repeating stuff already said, I find myself unable to read this thread in its entirety.

---

I claimed I can choose to believe what I want, but I can't choose to know what I want, agreed. If I could do that, I could chose to know everything that is knowable, which is obviously not possible and completely irrelevant to this subject.

However, if you talk about the believe of the phrase '2+2=5', then yes I can choose to believe this mathematical equation is right, like I have demonstrated over 10 times now. And I can demonstrate it many times in many different ways.

If I choose to believe the binary operator '+' means something else, then I can make 2+2 = 5.
If I choose to believe the operator '=' is '!=', then I can make 2+2=5.
If I choose to believe the symbol for four is actually 5, then I can make 2+2=5.

If it was 2+2=4 in maths, then yes it's a belief, and you can change it, like I demonstrated.
If you're talking about 2 objects next to 2 objects make 4, eventhen, I can choose to believe I'm in a dream and it'll make 5, or I can choose to believe the objects are rocks, and one of them break and make 5 rocks. But I cant choose my knowledge of two unbreakable objects put next to two other unbreakable objects make 4 unbreakable objects. But the equation 2+2=5 doesn't tell me wether the objects are breakable or not, this is something you assume.

2+2=4 in the math system is an equation based on a believe system.
2 objects put next to 2 objects making 4 objects is inherent knowledge.

I'm talking about beliefs, and other people are apparently talking about inherent knowledge. I didn't take into account people didn't know the difference between beliefs and inherent knowledge.

Claiming beliefs are the exact same thing as inherent knowledge, is like claiming your believe or disbelieve in God is also inherent knowledge. If it were inherent knowledge, please do demonstrate, and please do explain howcome some people believe in God and others don't.

The whole discussion about choosing your believes turned into some retarded discussion about people claiming "Beliefs = inherent knowledge"..

Quote:

---

The relationship between belief and knowledge is subtle. Believers in a claim typically say that they know that claim. For instance, those who believe that the Sun is a god will report that they know that the Sun is a god. However, the terms belief and knowledge are used differently by philosophers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

However, if you talk about the believe of the phrase '2+2=5', then yes I can choose to believe this mathematical equation is right, like I have demonstrated over 10 times now. And I can demonstrate it many times in many different ways.

If I choose to believe the binary operator '+' means something else, then I can make 2+2 = 5.
If I choose to believe the operator '=' is '!=', then I can make 2+2=5.
If I choose to believe the symbol for four is actually 5, then I can make 2+2=5.

---

How hard is it to understand? You are not supposed to change the symbols. You are supposed to believe the actual content of the symbolic representation "2+2=5" in standard maths notation.

Quote:

---

But I cant choose my knowledge of two unbreakable objects put next to two other unbreakable objects make 4 unbreakable objects. But the equation 2+2=5 doesn't tell me wether the objects are breakable or not, this is something you assume.

---

Things breaking isn't actually part of maths, you know. This has been explained before. If 1 breaks in half, you end up with 2 x 0.5, simple. Don't they teach you anything in school?

Quote:

---

2+2=4 in the math system is an equation based on a believe system.

---

A system of symbols is a language and not a belief system.

Quote:

---

2 objects put next to 2 objects making 4 objects is inherent knowledge.

I'm talking about beliefs, and other people are apparently talking about inherent knowledge. I didn't take into account people didn't know the difference between beliefs and inherent knowledge.

---

1. There is no difference. Knowledge is belief that is certain.

2. You just admitted your defeat. You said that you can believe anything by choice. Now you are reducing it to things that are not "inherent knowledge". Well, what does that mean? It means that you can only believe things for which there are no rational reasons to believe otherwise. While that is still an outlandish claim, it's not as outlandish as your previous claim.

Quote:

---

Claiming beliefs are the exact same thing as inherent knowledge, is like claiming your believe or disbelieve in God is also inherent knowledge.

---

Honest belief in God is a form of knowledge because it is associated with certainty.

Quote:

---

If it were inherent knowledge, please do demonstrate, and please do explain howcome some people believe in God and others don't.

---

Only because something is false doesn't mean you can't know it. In science no knowledge is absolutely certain. That doesn't mean it's just vague beliefs. Knowledge is a psychological phenomenon with no metaphysical properties connected to it.

Just the fact that you're arguing with me is already enough evidence that I can indeed choose what I believe. If I couldn't choose what I believed in, we would have the exact same beliefs, and there would be no discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Just the fact that you're arguing with me is already enough evidence that I can indeed choose what I believe. If I couldn't choose what I believed in, we would have the exact same beliefs, and there would be no discussion.

---

facepalm.png

Slapping your own face will not make my argument go away. Try again.

Chayba, I have something to say.

I'll make it very clear. I'll explain this thread, okay?

Now lean in close... Are you listening?

Do you believe that 2 + 2 = 5 in any and all circumstances?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Chayba, I have something to say.

I'll make it very clear. I'll explain this thread, okay?

Now lean in close... Are you listening?

Do you believe that 2 + 2 = 5 in any and all circumstances?

---

Ignoring my argument won't make my argument go away.

You're very much like an ostrich.

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/7343/ostrichak0.jpg
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/7...5c56c309d2.jpg

Really?

Well that's funny because I'm not the one dodging the questions...

I already answered the questions over 20 times. Any answer I give will result in you claiming I "dodge" the question. We've already been through this, you're repeating yourself. As long as you keep ignoring all my answers, we will keep going in circles.

Your question is "Can you choose to believe?"
My answer is "Yes."

How dodgy.

Chayba the answer is yes or no.

Answer it.

If I would have answered "No" this topic woudn't even exist. You completely fail at logic. This topic is the proof I already answered the question long time ago.

So then you answered yes and do in fact whole-heartedly believe that 2 + 2 = 5?

I said yes to the question wether I can choose to believe 2+2=5. Learn to read. It's right there in the topic. Pull your head out of the sand.

UM speicifcally asked whether you actually do believe.

So dodged the question.

So why are you still here?

If I say I can choose to believe whatever I want, then asking me if I believe this or that is a redudant question. I'm not dodging anything, you're just ignoring all my answers... you really should change your title into you know what.

No!

If someone asked you "Are you a theist?" saying "Well I can be anything I want." is not an answer.

Sorry try again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

No!

If someone asked you "Are you a theist?" saying "Well I can be anything I want." is not an answer.

Sorry try again.

---

Yes it is an answer. It means "yes, and more".

If someone asks me if I'm a christian, I can't answer just "yes" because i'm also a muslim, buddhist, etc.. I believe in all religions.

Answering with just "yes" would be only a small part of the answer. It would allow you to ignore the rest of the truth, much like an ostrich.

...

No, you wouldn't. Because the question wasn't if you were christian it was whether or not you were theist.

The answer is yes/no.

Pick one.

Apply that to UM's question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

i'm also a muslim, buddhist, etc.. I believe in all religions.

---

http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/uplo...in%20Hands.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

...

No, you wouldn't. Because the question wasn't if you were christian it was whether or not you were theist.

The answer is yes/no.

Pick one.

Apply that to UM's question.

---

The question was "Can you choose to believe anything?"
My answer is "Yes."

I have answered yes over 5 times, and you keep ignoring it. I'm done.

Someone lock this thread already...

:lock:

Quote:

---

i'm also a muslim, buddhist, etc.. I believe in all religions.

---

lolumz fantastic. There's no such thing as a lie?

Want to join my 'Xei is a giant money monster and if you don't pay him quickly he'll eat the whole planet religion'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

lolumz fantastic. There's no such thing as a lie?

Want to join my 'Xei is a giant money monster and if you don't pay him quickly he'll eat the whole planet religion'?

---

Everything has truth. Words hold truth even if they are dividing. The can do nothing but hold truth.

The truth is a lie.

Quote:

---

Everything has truth. Words hold truth even if they are dividing. The can do nothing but hold truth.

---

Okies then, dollerz plz.

I suppose the statement 'the truth is always a complete lie' is also true?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

If I would have answered "No" this topic woudn't even exist. You completely fail at logic. This topic is the proof I already answered the question long time ago.

---

No, you are just one of the several people who inspired this thread. The final kicker was a post from Really.

What you are dodging is going into 2 + 2 = 5 state of mind and doing an interview. Of course, you know that, troll.

But then the truth about it being a lie is false, so then it is true.

Which is false. And then it is sent into a never-ending recursion of True and falseness.

Words are only expression. Just motion.

Truth and lies are subjective.
Words are subjective.

Words are both truth and lies. Truth and lies are just different degrees of the same phenomenon ~ expression. They can be interpreted in many ways.

Which happens to be what this whole thread is about. Whether truth really is subjective - because if something is subjective, then by definition it can be chosen.
_____

I have a lot more I could say. It's 3:20am - fuck that.

Actually it's only 6.20pm according to subjectivity, so get your ass back over here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

2+2=4 in the math system is an equation based on a believe system.
2 objects put next to 2 objects making 4 objects is inherent knowledge.

I'm talking about beliefs, and other people are apparently talking about inherent knowledge. I didn't take into account people didn't know the difference between beliefs and inherent knowledge.

---

Ok, fair enough, but if you can truly believe something that contradicts your inherent knowledge...something's off in your head.

And the question isn't "can you choose to believe 2+2=5?" We already know your answer to that. The question is "do you believe 2+2=5?"

This is why 2+2=5. The value of each number relies solely on the existence of the other numbers. If the value of each number relies on the other numbers to exist. This means all number must share the commonality of being the same value. Because each number has the same power to eliminate all the other numbers by itself. So 4 is in fact equal value and power to the existence of 5. Because without 4 there would be no 5. Since all numbers hold this same power to take on any number. No number is any different in terms of value. Even though they rely on each other for their individuality. They are still essentially the same value and borrow their individual values from the other numbers. Their unique value is therefore an illusion created by the other numbers. 2+2=5 is just skipping past this illusion that the value of the numbers actually matter. When what really matters is the existence of the numbers themself and not their particular sequences created from each number to give each number it's value.

This was very easy for me because I am a hardcore philosopher.

Great, so now all you need to do is get rid of the value '1' and mathematics will come to a screetching halt.

I think that post was a joke... I hope.

If you got rid of the value 1. Numbers would not make sense because they would not exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

If you got rid of the value 1. Numbers would not make sense because they would not exist.

---

Hence mathematics stopping.

But you yourself disproved yourself.

2 + 2 = 1 + 2 + 1, yes, but it doesn't equal one or two or one, it equal one plus two plus one.

2+2=5 should now be blatantly easy to understand.

Quote:

---

But you yourself disproved yourself.
2 + 2 = 1 + 2 + 1, yes, but it doesn't equal one or two or one, it equal one plus two plus one.

---

I explained the context of both answers.

Yes; it's impossible.

Pretty sure that MP's just a troll account now.

Quote:

---

Yes; it's impossible.

---

No, I explained the answer. It's not impossible. Maybe you do not understand what I wrote?

Minervas, your flaw is in dealing only with the numbers as labels for amounts. When you remove language and deal solely with physical amounts your theory fails. 2 rocks dont need 4 rocks to justify their existence for example, they just are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

If the value of each number relies on the other numbers to exist. This means all number must share the commonality of being the same value.

---

Please can you justify this statement?

Rooj wether it is a number or an object the principle remains entirely the same. There would not be 4 rocks if it was impossible for two to exist. I have justified the statement by explaining the equal dependence of the numbers on each other for existence as their identity. You basically need to re-read what I wrote and understand it. Maybe I am not good at explaining it.

2 rocks cannot be sustained without the aid of other things. If 2 rocks can exist. So can 4 of them. But if 4 rocks can't exist. Neither can two of them. It is not a flaw.

Dependency is not identity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Slapping your own face will not make my argument go away. Try again.

---

Maybe if we slapped yours?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Just the fact that you're arguing with me is already enough evidence that I can indeed choose what I believe. If I couldn't choose what I believed in, we would have the exact same beliefs, and there would be no discussion.

---

Here you demonstrate your powerfully inadequate ability to infer. You assume that every person's brain functions exactly identical and that we've all been exposed to exactly the same experiences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korittke

How hard is it to understand? You are not supposed to change the symbols. You are supposed to believe the actual content of the symbolic representation "2+2=5" in standard maths notation.

---

You haven't actually done that, either, I remind you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

I believe in all religions.

---

Including atheism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark75

Including atheism?

---

My definition of religion doesn't include atheism. Neither does that of Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, or Marx.

But neverthelss, I can also choose to believe in atheism when it would fulfill a purpose. But right now, I believe it to be completely pointless.

Feel free to try and convince me that atheism has a point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

I have justified the statement by explaining the equal dependence of the numbers on each other for existence as their identity.

---

I believe i understand your theory a little better now:

That is that objects/concepts/whatevers that rely on other whatevers to form their identity can be said to be the same thing, that is the combination of all the whatevers. To go further with this theory then, as everything depends on the basic building blocks of the universe everything is essentially the same?

Please correct me if im wrong with the above.
So what it seems you are saying is because all numbers are part of a number system they're all "the number system" and equal to each other?

The very point of a number system is to aid human understanding, to seperate values, so your philosophy actually does more damage than good in this example. For basic human survival we need to be able to see things as seperate from each other, and to name them. They may well be combinations of other things for sure, but we still need to be able to view them as individual.. otherwise neat things like language can't exist. In order for you to expect us to be able to read and understand your words you expect us to view things as individual.
Although your example at first glance may seem to work as a rebuttal to UM's origional post its sadly overshadowed by the fact that its completely unusable in day to day life. If you did actually live, act and think in the fashion you put forward in your philosophical standpoint you couldnt function as a human being. You would no longer be able to think, speak or understand if you couldnt tell the difference between objects/concepts etc and their individual parts.
As expecting people to think in that way to form their belief systems is so impractical, and as you probably dont even do this yourself for your day to day belief systems, i dont believe it carries very much weight in the context of this debate.

Atheism is good for loosening stripped screws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

My definition of religion doesn't include atheism. Neither does that of Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, or Marx.

But neverthelss, I can also choose to believe in atheism when it would fulfill a purpose. But right now, I believe it to be completely pointless.

Feel free to try and convince me that atheism has a point.

---

The point of atheism is that it doesn't have a point... at least that you understood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

My definition of religion doesn't include atheism. Neither does that of Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, or Marx.

But neverthelss, I can also choose to believe in atheism when it would fulfill a purpose. But right now, I believe it to be completely pointless.

Feel free to try and convince me that atheism has a point.

---

Stop defining religion for me!!

I found it!

Quote:

---

Well, theres no difference between atheism and theism anyway. Atheists are just in the closet theists.

---

Well, I've got my maths A level in eight hours, and I'll be fucked if I'm going to pay the slightest bit of attention to any of this bull in it. We all know that 2 and 2 makes 4 anyway and finding people who think that it's possible argue otherwise that is just a way of weeding out the loonies to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Feel free to try and convince me that atheism has a point.

---

Deism is a form of theism.

Do you agree that Deism as point and Atheism hasn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

But neverthelss, I can also choose to believe in atheism when it would fulfill a purpose. But right now, I believe it to be completely pointless.

---

So you would change your beliefs for your convenience? That's a strong core belief system there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

So you would change your beliefs for your convenience? That's a strong core belief system there.

---

Chayba lives in a world where he will say anything just so he doesn't have to admit that he is wrong... Or she...or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maestro

But I'll still have the same amount of rocks in my pile, cracked into pieces or not. Just different fractions.

---

If you take a crumb and break it in two, how many crumbs do you now have?

Quote:

---

I believe i understand your theory a little better now:

That is that objects/concepts/whatevers that rely on other whatevers to form their identity can be said to be the same thing, that is the combination of all the whatevers. To go further with this theory then, as everything depends on the basic building blocks of the universe everything is essentially the same?

---

You demonstrate a superior understanding than most others on the forum.

Quote:

---

So what it seems you are saying is because all numbers are part of a number system they're all "the number system" and equal to each other?

---

Very very close. But not entirely. In the context that 2+2=5. The logic involved is in understanding the nature of numbers themself and why 2+2 can equal 5.

Quote:

---

The very point of a number system is to aid human understanding, to seperate values, so your philosophy actually does more damage than good in this example.

---

I didn't create a thread that asked to justify 2+2=5. I just responded to how it works. It doesn't do any damage if you understand the purpose of mathematics. My philosophy is using mathematics to allow room for the equation of 2+2=5. People have just lost touch with the purpose of maths and come to think that mathematics means you can't do something. Well the entire point of mathematics is using it as a means to making things possible. Not the other way around.

Maybe if I try it in more of a mathematical equation. Maybe that will help since people are more mathematically inclined here.

When X=infinite numbers. X=all numbers existent.
Therefore X=5, X=4. 2+2=4. Therefore 2+2=X. Since X=5. 2+2=5

Quote:

---

For basic human survival we need to be able to see things as seperate from each other, and to name them. They may well be combinations of other things for sure, but we still need to be able to view them as individual.. otherwise neat things like language can't exist. In order for you to expect us to be able to read and understand your words you expect us to view things as individual.

---

I am not denying that. I'm just showing the way in which combinations can be used to achieve a certain result.

Quote:

---

Although your example at first glance may seem to work as a rebuttal to UM's origional post its sadly overshadowed by the fact that its completely unusable in day to day life. If you did actually live, act and think in the fashion you put forward in your philosophical standpoint you couldnt function as a human being. You would no longer be able to think, speak or understand if you couldnt tell the difference between objects/concepts etc and their individual parts.

---

I think you know that I use this in my daily life constantly to communicate with you right now and I'm still able to respond to people and live. It's more efficient than if you didn't understand how it's done. If you understand that mathematical equation you are not going to be deceived so easily rather than the other way around.

Quote:

---

As expecting people to think in that way to form their belief systems is so impractical, and as you probably dont even do this yourself for your day to day belief systems.

---

The problem here is your discernment about practical use of that equation is not the same as my discernment of how I think it should be used. You might think that I would then live completely passive unable to function. But the opposite is true I use the equations (we just need to call it that for now) only towards the goal of what needs to be done. If you need to measure a distance for example. You don't say ok all distances are the same. Even though this is a mathematical equation and true. You don't use that equation to measure things. Because that's not what it's for. That's why you need more than logic about what is true to function otherwise you would have no discernment about what complex equations is best to use for your situation. In that case I would use the numbers to measure the distance as it's the most effective for that purpose. If I wanted to prove that distance is illusionary I just use the golden ratio. The same way I just used X to prove that numbers were illusionary. The purpose of it is so you can get a better grasp on reality and use it to your advantage by having a stronger foundation about what is possible. Using it to have a richer existence in life.

Quote:

---

Maybe if I try it in more of a mathematical equation. Maybe that will help since people are more mathematically inclined here.

When X=infinite numbers. X=all numbers existent.
Therefore X=5, X=4. 2+2=4. Therefore 2+2=X. Since X=5. 2+2=5

---

That's an 'equation', is it? -_-

X is a value in equations, a single value at one time, not multiple values. The domain of X can have infinitely many values including all real numbers and imaginary numbers. 'All numbers existent' is not a value, it is a domain, so you can't make a statement like 'All numbers existent is equilvalent to 5', that's wrong. Clearly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

I think you know that I use this in my daily life constantly to communicate with you right now and I'm still able to respond to people and live.

---

But this isnt quite true, you discuss your philosophy as true, but you do so in a frame of falseness. The reason for this is because its impossible to actually 'use' your philosophy while discussing it, its self defeating. Let me attempt to explain:
Lets take one of your statements from a different thread:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MP

That's ok because I can keep beating you anyway.

---

From your own philosophy, both winning and losing rely on one another, they have the power to wipe each other out, because of this you cant actually win under your philosophy, because winning is the same as losing.

To run a little further with this then, we could question what philosophy actually is, what thought and imagination are, what the brain and neurons are, and we can come to the conclusion that your philosophy doesnt actually exist as an independant philosophy. In order for your philosophy to be valid, it cant actually exist as a philosophy at all (while using your philosophy), we must approach your philosophy without using it in order to validate it, because the most affective way to disprove it is to assume that its true.

Its a paradox, the most damaging thing to your philosophy is... the philosophy, which could be used again and again to annihilate itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

The problem here is your discernment about practical use of that equation is not the same as my discernment of how I think it should be used.

---

I understand this, but it doesn't change the fact that its impractical to use on a daily basis for all beliefs. Sure you may flex it to prove a point, but I think the idea of this thread is to determine whether normal everyday people can choose to believe something.
Another thing id like to point out is that you're not actually choosing to believe a different belief system, you already have a belief system that can incorporate the maths put forward here and you're simply using this.

I apologise that this response is rushed but im short on time, if you need anything clarifying just ask.

Quote:

---

X is a value in equations, a single value at one time, not multiple values.

---

Infinite is a value expressed. That's what X was.

Quote:

---

The domain of X can have infinitely many values including all real numbers and imaginary numbers. 'All numbers existent' is not a value, it is a domain, so you can't make a statement like 'All numbers existent is equilvalent to 5', that's wrong. Clearly.

---

X is the infinite value. An infinite value does not have a number and does not exist. So you can say whatever number and that can be as X. Since X doesn't even exist or have a limit you can make it anything and it will still be correct as X.

It looks like whatever education you had did not help you understand that.

Unfortunately, made-up maths aren't commonly taught.

That is part of mathematics. Look the value of infinite up.

Take your own advice, because you're the one who has it wrong.

Quote:

---

But this isnt quite true, you discuss your philosophy as true, but you do so in a frame of falseness. The reason for this is because its impossible to actually 'use' your philosophy while discussing it, its self defeating.

---

Well I use my philosophy all the time. But not in a frame of falseness. I don't know why you think it's false or I would change it. When I say things like. 'I'll just keep defeating you'. It's just a little competition joke remark nothing to be taken entirely to heart. If someone can teach me something that is above me I'm grateful.

Quote:

---

From your own philosophy, both winning and losing rely on one another, they have the power to wipe each other out, because of this you cant actually win under your philosophy, because winning is the same as losing.

---

I'm just trying to learn so winning is not my concern. But when you have more understanding you naturally do win. Wether the person who loses is aware of it or not. Some people don't want to lose and that is more important to them then learning. So they give up and just say they have won. There is a difference between pretending you have won and then actually having more knowledge and it depends on the results you are capable of preforming. That will be the final say.

Quote:

---

To run a little further with this then, we could question what philosophy actually is, what thought and imagination are, what the brain and neurons are, and we can come to the conclusion that your philosophy doesnt actually exist as an independant philosophy. In order for your philosophy to be valid, it cant actually exist as a philosophy at all (while using your philosophy), we must approach your philosophy without using it in order to validate it, because the most affective way to disprove it is to assume that its true.

---

I have no idea what you are talking about. My philosophy can exist and does not disprove itself otherwise it would not be one.

Quote:

---

Its a paradox, the most damaging thing to your philosophy is... the philosophy, which could be used again and again to annihilate itself.

---

It's actually the most vital thing. The most sophisticated because it can never die no matter how hard you try it will always prevail. This has gone way off track to my explanation for 2+2=5

Quote:

---

I understand this, but it doesn't change the fact that its impractical to use on a daily basis for all beliefs. Sure you may flex it to prove a point, but I think the idea of this thread is to determine whether normal everyday people can choose to believe something.

---

Before you can choose a belief you have to figure out why it's true first. If you can't figure out how it's true you can't believe it.

Quote:

---

Take your own advice, because you're the one who has it wrong.

---

So I'm just suppose to bow down to you and accept because you wanted to say I'm wrong?

Quote:

---

\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \, f(i) = x means that the sum of the infinite series converges to some real value x.

---

In other words. X can go into 5. X can also go into 4.
Hence 2+2=4 If 4 is X
since X can be 5. 2+2=5

Apparently it's called an infinite series formula. I'm not an expert in mathematics but using my brain I already knew such a thing had to exist anyway.

Quote:

---

X is the infinite value. An infinite value does not have a number and does not exist. So you can say whatever number and that can be as X. Since X doesn't even exist or have a limit you can make it anything and it will still be correct as X.

It looks like whatever education you had did not help you understand that.

---

Either you're trolling or you have no grasp of relatively simple maths.

The infinite value is called 'infinity'. It doesn't really exist and cannot be used in virtually all mathematics because it gives incorrect results. It is tantamount (and in fact equivalent) to dividing by zero.

Infinity cannot take any value as you claim because infinity is very precisely defined and has only 'one' - per se - value. If x is an element of the real numbers such as 5 then x is not equivalent to infinity.

Quote:

---

\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \, f(i) = x means that the sum of the infinite series converges to some real value x.

In other words. X can go into 5. X can also go into 4.
Hence 2+2=4 If 4 is X
since X can be 5. 2+2=5

---

No, those two things have nothing to do with each other. Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Do you have any mathematics qualifications? What do these loose terms mean, like 'X can go into 4'? That's not a mathematical statement. x can go into 4 4/x times. x can go into 5 5/x times. The sum of a converging series is equal to a finite real number, not the 'infinite value'. For example 2 is the sum of the infinite addition of 1 followed by half of the previous term. That does not mean that 2 is equal to infinity in any shape or form.

I was talking about X as the result of the infinite series formula and it's potential to converge into a value. That value can be whatever value you want to converge a series of infinite numbers into. X as that formula can be 5 or 4. Or any number. How many different ways do I have to say it before you grasp the concept.

X can result in 5 or 4.
Since 2+2=4

And X can result in both 5 and 4

2+2 can equal X.
X can be 5. So 2+2 can equal 5

The same infinite sum of convergence cannot give a different answer.

Again, 'X can result in 5 or 4' means nothing mathematically. X is not a function.

If you're going to write out a mathematical proof then do it properly. Don't use vague words; in fact, don't use any words at all. If you can prove it properly then you won't require any language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

When X=infinite numbers. X=all numbers existent.
Therefore X=5, X=4. 2+2=4. Therefore 2+2=X. Since X=5. 2+2=5

---

X does not equal 5. X does not equal 4. X=infinite numbers.

X is merely representative of an unknown number...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandform

The point is, can anyone actually believe that two coke cans when set next to two more coke cans will equal five coke cans. If they know what four coke cans means. Or rather, can they choose to believe such. If you actually believed this and you were a good person, or a greedy person, then you would continously put them next to eachother to get that fifth coke can and sell/give it away.

---

No body answered me except for those who said no.

If X equals whatever number you want it to equal. Then X=4.
2+2=4. 2+2=X. X=5. 2+2=5.

It is possible in mathematics to have a number that can be two or infinite more numbers at the same time. I just don't know the equation for it yet. The closest I have found so far is the infinite series formula. But people aren't satisfied with it.

Sandform. I'll get back to you on that one don't worry.

That's just not how maths work.

Quote:

---

If X equals whatever number you want it to equal. Then X=4.
2+2=4. 2+2=X. X=5. 2+2=5.

It is possible in mathematics to have a number that can be two or infinite more numbers at the same time. I just don't know the equation for it yet. The closest I have found so far is the infinite series formula. But people aren't satisfied with it.

---

...lol, basically.

For the purposes of your education, x can only have one value in any situation. Once you assign x a value then you must be consistent, irregardless of what the possible domain of x was before you chose it.

There are no numbers which can be more than one number at a single instant. Sort of reminds me of the number called the recipriversexcluson which is everything but itself; but before that gets pounced upon I should point out that it's a Douglas Adams joke and it's completely fictional. The nearest you get to such things are functions with multiple roots, for example sinx=0. Then x can be 0, pi, 2pi, 3pi, etcetera; those are values of x that 'might' be solutions, but x does not have multiple values at the same time.

Sums of geometric series have nothing to do with any of this as far as I can see.

This is getting a little off topic i agree, but as your belief example relies so heavily on your own personal philosophy i guess we could say its pertinent.

Its important to remember the following:
If someones basic philosophy was that there was no such thing as choice, and that everything we do and think was a result of cause and effect, it would stand to reason that in order for that idea to be true the idea itself had to have emerged through cause and effect. This is no different to your own idea's, in order for your idea's to be valid, they too must fit in with the philosophy you put forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Well I use my philosophy all the time. But not in a frame of falseness.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

I have no idea what you are talking about.

---

Firstly of course you know what im talking about, to not understand relies solely on the existence of the ability to understand. If the ability to understand and not understand relies on each other to exist, this means that both not understanding and understanding must share the commonality of being the same thing...
Ill use that to address both statements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

My philosophy can exist and does not disprove itself otherwise it would not be one.

---

If your philosophy is correct then it must, by its own law, be equally incorrect.. as both correct and incorrect have the same power to wipe each other out and so are the same. This inconsistency kills your idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

It's actually the most vital thing. The most sophisticated because it can never die no matter how hard you try it will always prevail.

---

I've shown above that when turned on itself you can easily show its fragility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Before you can choose a belief you have to figure out why it's true first. If you can't figure out how it's true you can't believe it.

---

Good point, you just pretty much proved UM's origional post apart from your own views, and once again ill reiterate, its still impractical to base all our beliefs on this view.

Nope x can be 4 or 5 but not 4 and 5. That's a fairly simple way of expressing it.

Xei That's not good enough I need a number that can be anything so I can make it a 4 and a five at the same time. Surely there is an equation.

If there is the golden ratio for distance there must be a number version of it. Wait I think that is the solution. The golden ratio is the equation that makes 4 and 5 the same.

RooJ your just using your understanding of my philosophy to make it incorrect. The fact that you couldn't do it without using that philosophy proves it's superiority. I can say the opposite of what you said and it would totally reverse your efforts to make the philosophy invalid.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...o_line.svg.png

The total length a+b is to the longer segment a as a is to the shorter segment b.

So the higher number 5 is to what lower number 4 is to 5. So 2+2=5

You can define x as a member of all numbers and then it can by 'anything', but it cannot be 'everything' simultaneously. Otherwise you'd be able to get incorrect answers like 2+2=5, which is impossible in maths if you follow the strict rules.

The golden number is just a very precise value. The ratio of the golden number plus another number to the golden number is equal to the ratio of the golden ratio to the other number. It has the exact value of (1+root5)/2. It makes pretty rectangles and spirals but it's nothing remarkable and it definitely can't have any value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

RooJ your just using your understanding of my philosophy to make it incorrect.

---

No, to show that its incorrect, its good to see you're starting to grasp it though. The philosophy itself must follow the same rules as it promotes as the philosophy itself came from your mind, which is part of the same whole the philosophy is meant to govern.

Hence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RooJ

its self defeating

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RooJ

Its a paradox, the most damaging thing to your philosophy is... the philosophy, which could be used again and again to annihilate itself.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RooJ

If your philosophy is correct then it must, by its own law, be equally incorrect..

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RooJ

I've shown that when turned on itself you can easily show its fragility.

---

RooJ I can say the opposite of what you said and it would totally reverse your efforts to make the philosophy invalid. The nature of it is so superior that it simply requires choice to make it true without being confined to any restrictions including itself. That is a freedom not a flaw. Truth not inconsistency.

Xei what I posted above proves the 2 different lengths equal the same thing. That is the same result as two different numbers being the same. So that is the equation in mathematics that solves that problem and makes 2+2=5 possible.

Reply to your edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

I can say the opposite of what you said and it would totally reverse your efforts to make the philosophy invalid.

---

Reversing the statements would just highlight a gap in your ability to use basic logic.. but ill do it for you.. watch:
If your philosophy is incorrect then it must, by its own law, be equally correct.
this is obviously logically inaccurate as if your philosophy is incorrect we dont have to continue using it to finish the statement, we'd just simply have "If your philosophy is incorrect then.. unlucky."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

without being confined to any restrictions including itself

---

This is impossible, it was born in your mind, which you claim is part of the whole, therefore it must follow the same rules or disprove itself.

With each passing attempt to worm your way through this debate you come closer to making yourself out a liar:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

If someone can teach me something that is above me I'm grateful.

---

Quote:

---

Reversing the statements would just highlight a gap in your ability to use basic logic.. but ill do it for you.. watch:

---

Reversing the statements would just fill the gap in your ability to use basic logic. Not highlight it.

Quote:

---

If your philosophy is incorrect then it must, by its own law, be equally correct.

---

By it's own law it is only correct, because that's the same thing. According to it's law.

Quote:

---

this is obviously logically inaccurate as if your philosophy is incorrect we dont have to continue using it to finish the statement, we'd just simply have "If your philosophy is incorrect then.. unlucky."

---

It's obviously logically accurate as it's entirely correct we have to finish the statement. We'd just simply put My philosophy is correct....So. Lucky me.

That's me reversing it on you again. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RooJ

This is impossible, it was born in your mind, which you claim is part of the whole, therefore it must follow the same rules or disprove itself.

---

Nothing is impossible. If my mind is part of the whole than my mind is the rules. Using the golden ratio equation above I the lesser portion of the whole added with the larger portion. Is precisely to the larger portion what I am by myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Reversing the statements would just fill the gap in your ability to use basic logic. Not highlight it.

---

Explain please.

Quote:

---

By it's own law it is only correct, because that's the same thing. According to it's law.

---

No, by its own law it cant just be correct, unless you're saying 2+2 can only equal 5?.. or have you decided the best way out is just to alter your own philosophy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

It's obviously logically accurate as it's entirely correct we have to finish the statement. We'd just simply put My philosophy is correct....So. Lucky me.

---

Please dont insult me, if you intend to challenge my idea's put effort in. We dont need to deal with your idea if its incorrect, period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Nothing is impossible. If my mind is part of the whole than my mind is the rules.

---

If your mind is part of the whole your mind follows the rules, if its possible not to follow the rules then the rules dont exist as static rules. Whats the point of a philosophy/theory of everything if it doesnt govern everything?

Quote:

---

Explain please.

---

Have a good hard think about it.

Quote:

---

No, by its own law it cant just be correct, unless you're saying 2+2 can only equal 5?.. or have you decided the best way out is just to alter your own philosophy?

---

It's not altering the philosophy. It's filling the gaps in the ability to use basic logic. You have not considered what the philosophy is entirely so you think it's impossible, when it's just a gap in ability to use logic.

Quote:

---

If your mind is part of the whole your mind follows the rules, if its possible not to follow the rules then the rules dont exist as static rules. Whats the point of a philosophy/theory of everything if it doesnt govern everything?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by minervas phoenix

If my mind is part of the whole than my mind is the rules. Using the golden ratio equation above I the lesser portion of the whole added with the larger portion. Is precisely to the larger portion what I am by myself.

---

If I am the rules I will lead them and make them static and govern everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Have a good hard think about it.

---

If you cant explain your own statement i can only assume its invalid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

It's not altering the philosophy. It's filling the gaps in the ability to use basic logic. You have not considered what the philosophy is entirely so you think it's impossible, when it's just a gap in ability to use logic.

---

Then its in your failure to explain the extra rules you've now decided to throw in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

If I am the rules I will lead them and make them static and govern everything.

---

So essentially you're that desperate not to admit you're philosophy has imploded infront of you, you're now claiming to be god heh, to control the whole with your mighty philosophy.

Well thank you.. was interesting while it lasted :)

Minervas, are you ready to be interviewed?

For those who are confused, x represents an unknown/ungiven number. If 2 + 2 = x, then x = 4, not 5. If 2 + 3 = x, then x = 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Xei That's not good enough I need a number that can be anything so I can make it a 4 and a five at the same time. Surely there is an equation.

---

You could have the domain of X be more than one number...but it's more than one number all at once. In your case, X=1,2,3,4,5,...but never just 4 or just 5.

Quote:

---

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...o_line.svg.png

The total length a+b is to the longer segment a as a is to the shorter segment b.

So the higher number 5 is to what lower number 4 is to 5. So 2+2=5

---

uh...ok, are you trying to say this?

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a127/xpersonx/agh.png

thus 2+2=5? ...I don't follow.

Actually I don't think that up there is even right.

..well, I guess I'll hope I misunderstood you :)

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a127/xpersonx/agh.png

That's exactly what I am saying. Thanks for the diagram. lol.

9 is to 5 as 5 is to 4

In this example according to the golden ratio 9 and 5 have the same value between them as 5 and 4. If 5 and 4 a different amount can have the same value present as 9 and 5. Then 4 on it's own can be justified as similar to 5 because of this mathematical proportion existing.

The reason I can say it's the same value is because in between those numbers the golden ratio proves there will always be the same proportion existing. It's another way of saying numbers can be divided to any value from any amount present. So 4 and 5 must hold the same amount if that is even possible. Otherwise they couldn't be divided identically with the same result with the same value in this way. This is proved through the proportions stated which can be measured against the numbers themself mathematically. Although it would take an infinite amount of divisions to get the value. The value is proved existing already through the presence of the golden ratio.

That formula is correct

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a127/xpersonx/agh.png

That's exactly what I am saying. Thanks for the diagram. lol.

9 is to 5 as 5 is to 4

According to the golden ratio 9 and 5 have the same value between them as 5 and 4. If 5 and 4 a different amount can have the same value present as 9 and 5. Then 4 on it's own can be justified as similar to 5 because of this mathematical proportion existing.

The reason I can say it's the same value is because in between those numbers the golden ratio proves there will always be the same proportion existing. It's another way of saying numbers can be divided to any value from any amount present. So 4 and 5 must hold the same amount if that is even possible. Otherwise they couldn't be divided identically with the same result with the same value in this way. This is proved through the proportions stated which can be measured against the numbers themself mathematically.

That formula is correct

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

---

Wrong. a and b cannot be just any values. There is an exact division on a line segment where the golden ratio works. The longer segment's ratio to the smaller segment must be 1.6180339887. It does not work with 4 and 5. 9/5 does not = 5/4. If it did, 36 would equal 25 since the cross products of any proportion are automatically equal.

Also, similarity is not synonymous with equality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

You have it wrong I never said 9/5=5/4. What world are you in? That is not what the golden ratio is.

---

"9 is to 5 as 5 is to 4"

;)

Did you even read any of the wikipedia page that you just quoted? This has nothing to do with 5 equalling 4. Either you are playing a joke, or you're just stupid.

In fact, with the numbers put into that equation as Kael did, it doesn't even fit the principals of the Golden ratio if you actually work it out. (9:5 does not equal 5:4)

You understanding of mathematics is very lacking, and I would guess that you are currently in a Pre-Algebra class.

Quote:

---

Wrong. a and b cannot be just any values. There is an exact division on a line segment where the golden ratio works. 9/5 does not = 5/4.

---

You have it wrong I never said 9/5=5/4. What world are you in? That is not what the golden ratio is. Read my post again.

Quote:

---

The reason I can say it's the same value is because in between those numbers the golden ratio proves there will always be the same proportion existing. It's another way of saying numbers can be divided to any value from any amount present. So 4 and 5 must hold the same amount if that is even possible. Otherwise they couldn't be divided identically with the same result with the same value in this way. This is proved through the proportions stated which can be measured against the numbers themself mathematically.

---

Even though it would take an infinite number of divisions to get the same value. The golden ratio itself can be measured from the numbers themself as existing so we know that it's possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StephenT

You understanding of mathematics is very lacking, and I would guess that you are currently in a Pre-Algebra class.

---

Or a pre-troll class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Even though it would take an infinite number of divisions to get the same value. The golden ratio itself can be measured from the numbers themself as existing so we know that it's possible.

---

That makes no sense. You just said nothing.

Universal mind do you even know what the golden ratio is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

9 is to 5 as 5 is to 4

---

There we go. Your words. Your false words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Universal mind do you even know what the golden ratio is?

---

Yes. I am a former math teacher. Have you taken pre-algebra yet? Read carefully...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Wrong. a and b cannot be just any values. There is an exact division on a line segment where the golden ratio works. The longer segment's ratio to the smaller segment must be 1.6180339887. It does not work with 4 and 5. 9/5 does not = 5/4. If it did, 36 would equal 25 since the cross products of any proportion are automatically equal.

---

boy oh boy oh boy.....

Maybe someone out there has the knowledge to appreciate the answer.

http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/ASC1216.jpg

Quote:

---

Wrong. a and b cannot be just any values. There is an exact division on a line segment where the golden ratio works. The longer segment's ratio to the smaller segment must be 1.6180339887. It does not work with 4 and 5. 9/5 does not = 5/4. If it did, 36 would equal 25 since the cross products of any proportion are automatically equal.

---

It is not about a and b values. It's between them. what do you mean there is a exact division on a line segment where it works? That makes no sense at all. What are you talking about? At least what I say makes perfect sense. 1.6180339887 is not the full number of the golden ratio so it's not even the proper value for it. It works with any measurement that you can do. it doesn't have to be a particular size to work.

I don't even think you understand what the golden ratio is. As when I asked you what is was all you did was quote me. Then you gave an incorrect finite value for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

boy oh boy oh boy.....

Maybe someone out there has the knowledge to appreciate the answer.

---

I appreciate the creative aspect... but am disappointed with the outcome of failure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

I don't even think you understand what the golden ratio is. As when I asked you what is was all you did was quote me.

---

No, I quoted myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Then you gave an incorrect finite value for it.

---

No, that is the correct value. It is right there in the very link you provided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

It is not about a and b values. It's between them. what do you mean there is a exact division on a line segment where it works? That makes no sense at all. What are you talking about? At least what I say makes perfect sense. 1.6180339887 is not the full number of the golden ratio so it's not even the proper value for it. It works with any measurement that you can do. it doesn't have to be a particular size to work.

---

The people who come to this site are much smarter than you think. It's not like they're going, "Uh, what that Mivervas is saying sounds like it might make sense to a smart person, so maybe she's right." 9/5 does not equal 5/4, and the vast majority of the people who read this will know that. It is not the case that any two line segment single division measures will give the golden ratio. It is simple, and you are not going to fool too many people with this pathetic game you are playing. Your trolling is becoming a major failure. I hope trolling is not your only hobby.

Quote:

---

Did you even read any of the wikipedia page that you just quoted? This has nothing to do with 5 equalling 4. Either you are playing a joke, or you're just stupid.

In fact, with the numbers put into that equation as Kael did, it doesn't even fit the principals of the Golden ratio if you actually work it out. (9:5 does not equal 5:4)

You understanding of mathematics is very lacking, and I would guess that you are currently in a Pre-Algebra class

---

Hey StephenT

The conclusion was 5 can equal 4. From the existence of the proportions evident in the golden ratio. Value is made insignificant if you can measure the same proportion in different amount sizes.

I don't know how else to explain it.


Universal mind. Why are you blatantly making things up? In the link I provided the golden ratio is approximately 1.6180339887.[1]. But it has no finite value. You are just wrong and hoping others will not find out? Why else would you be arguing it makes no sense.

Quote:

---

It is not the case that any two line segment single division measures will give the golden ratio.

---

That makes absolutely no sense. It is proven in mathematics that the golden ratio exists through basic line drawings. It can be drawn to any size the size does not matter.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...am-phi.svg.png

Draw it smaller with the same proportion and the same value is present even though it will be a different size.

Here's how ratios work.

a is to b as c is to d

a/b=c/d

a*d=b*c

Let's use your ratio.

4 is to 5 as 5 is to 9

4/5=5/9

4*9=5*5

36=25

Your ratio has been disproved.

Quote:

---

4/5=5/9
4*9=5*5
36=25

---

That is nothing to do with the golden ratio though. Study this drawing please.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ntagon.svg.png

Whatever size you make it. The proportions will be the same. The value in between will be the same. Hence whatever value a number is the proportion is the same as the other numbers.

When the numbers fit into the golden ratio. Not every number works within the golden ratio.

Here, gimme a sec, I'll try to demonstrate it graphically.

You can see that the length of CD will always be the same CD length no matter what size you make the drawing. You can see that though right?

Saying that not every number is included in the golden ratio is like saying that you can't choose what size to make that drawing. I know that isn't what your saying but every number does fit into the golden ratio because you can make the drawing to any size and it will still work. Measure the proportions to any number you wish. It will still work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

You can see that the length of CD will always be the same CD length no matter what size you make the drawing. You can see that though right?

---

Um, are you talking about the physical length or the length of the music on it?

Quote:

---

Saying that not every number is included in the golden ratio is like saying that you can't choose what size to make that drawing. I know that isn't what your saying but every number does fit into the golden ratio because you can make the drawing to any size and it will still work. Measure the proportions to any number you wish. It will still work.

---

Well, here we go.

Here's the golden ratio with numbers 5 and 4 and 9
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...onx/ratio1.png

The one segment is made up of 5 parts
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...onx/ratio2.png

The other is made up of 4 parts
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...onx/ratio3.png

or...uh..looks like 3 parts there...

Forget the numbers 5 and 4. That has nothing to do with it. That was just a example to call it something. It could be A B F or whatever. Look at the drawing of the mathematical proportions. Post it to a different size. Post one at one size and then post a smaller version next to it. You only divided it up into 8 parts but it's labeled as 9. It doesn't matter where one dot starts and ends it's the same line. But forget about that example there is a better way.

I'm talking about this drawing
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ntagon.svg.png

forget the other drawing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

In the link I provided the golden ratio is approximately 1.6180339887.[1]. But it has no finite value.

---

The golden ratio is infinite? :rolllaugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

Well, here we go.

Here's the golden ratio with numbers 5 and 4 and 9
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...onx/ratio1.png

The one segment is made up of 5 parts
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...onx/ratio2.png

The other is made up of 4 parts
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...onx/ratio3.png

or...uh..looks like 3 parts there...

---

Good demonstration. Yep, it is very close to being a 5 to 3 split. 8/5 is very close to 5/3. 24 is very close to 25, but 25 is far from 36. The golden ratio does not work for 4 and 5.

This is all beside the point any way. Minervas took the golden ratio, improperly inserted 4 and 5, and then made an equality point that was not even coherent.

:D Will do

http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...1&d=1212471403

http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...1&d=1212471403

I think I see what you're trying to say. Any numbers can work, yes, but not any combination of numbers can work. Once you've determined one number, that number determines the others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Good demonstration. Yep, it is very close to being a 5 to 3 split. 8/5 is very close to 5/3. 24 is very close to 25, but 25 is far from 36. The golden ratio does not work for 4 and 5.

This is all beside the point any way. Minervas took the golden ratio, improperly inserted 4 and 5, and then made an equality point that was not even coherent.

---

I planned to get to that but got held up...by there not being 4 parts...anyway I think I proved the insertion of 4 was improper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

Any numbers can work, yes, but not any combination of numbers can work. Once you've determined one number, that number determines the others.

---

Well put.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

anyway I think I proved the insertion of 4 was improper.

---

Definitely.