text
stringlengths 1
41.5k
| label
stringlengths 4
23
| dataType
stringclasses 2
values | communityName
stringlengths 4
23
| datetime
stringdate 2007-06-05 00:00:00
2025-05-14 00:00:00
| username_encoded
stringlengths 136
160
| url_encoded
stringlengths 188
560
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Right, so zero points on the front page now. | r/reddit.com | comment | r/reddit.com | 2008-02-05 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ZDlGRjQ4UUNvZzVnWlVIWnFSUWo0QmRPZ0toMW5sbGJ3ai1NOHlkSXVHNVRqeTZtRTZmMnJiN3JGcHRSNDIzb3IxejBrYjdvMVNPZXota2RPTkVQaGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaczdUVktxQjJPWVNNU2VYS01VODk4dFllal83b2lTMTc1UzFEbUJvN0pCc2JTWk15MDUzbHVISG82UmJ2eVFxQnFwNU15MW9DVEtHUlRPRU9hem94c0lPeWR2YzVHVnlpeWcxd3h1dkYwcGZlUTY0dlNkOW1RbVNxUERxZElKcnpMUUtUYjFFYUw4c1lZTEl0WWc2WXEwamVZeTh5T3QzNGtVS0N6cjUwUUsycVJWcnJxWjFoaXV5ZnRRclNNWDhGbHJFZ0hzQ3VJdURlMi13d0tCV3pTQT09 |
l2spell moran
sorry, I had to =( | r/reddit.com | comment | r/reddit.com | 2008-02-05 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2eGdRSzVmVG9BXzRvRWpLNFlzOWZIeTZsUmJNSFZJcHQ1b01sekcxSzBPdlB4YmVmckkzQ2M4MjZuRUFTN2c5eTJBSFZ3RkZ1c1hNX3lkd0tleXlQNnc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaV0RzeW51ZEdnMDltVE4tUWZZNFgwRkQ4YnFDQWRWWlJ1ZXVvZGtrZTNld2V0ZzRidU93MHpxSVJHSWhVX2FJV1pncWhHbVQtUmJ3bTM0Tnd6blN6bzExYmYxVjJqVEV2NlVTaUdRS1VleTdjTFFtYTRYNUdhanEzTEZGVVhYY0hmY3ktVS1EQWJyYm5rNGlLOGhvQ0Y0YUxzSUo0YU1kZ2ZUU2JWYW1jQ3ZlZm1LeVJLYXhoc2diTFpYY0FYaVJnczR0SnpDUHFXTkhLcWpMMHNBRWdMUT09 |
How would you distinguish a piece of paper as a ballot in that small of an icon? Perhaps just write BALLOT on the paper. | r/reddit.com | comment | r/reddit.com | 2008-02-05 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2OVc5Qzg5ckhHcUU2NURZbEs3d0d4MzJWWG1SWVNTQXhFOGx2aVVrakpoTGdtOTlQVWloeU1rVDdTaUp0T1VTMlZGMzZlRVhzazI4dXI3b1M3TklLNlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaY0xrREdDMm9JeFQyRk5hajRmNXpycUwxbUpFYUtmTHlOYVlaWG9kck1kY0kxdW0zSFRCM2ZzcWFpSEZDamFvVEtGU2hMYUlJYWt4cVNyRHhrdlVnQUhoS1JjLWNEdmd0N0V2MjhZalFSYVBjTHphNi1nVmdVY29Yc1plUl9FZnZGNlhxdHh3V2ZkZUhwQ2duRE5WXzUxSG9aQUhETzcyTjdwUW5IRjctSVRzbkR0akJlczI1dnI0WDVtYk5IYTdaenBKLVZKdmRleE1INzBMdVVXejhKZz09 |
So it does not matter if the US invade anywhere? | r/reddit.com | comment | r/reddit.com | 2008-02-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2TUJ1TDJVYnVNSGJHdDNoek5vbGdGTmJwNm40MmxEeVhGTnMyN3R5SWlCWEtpOC1FXzVHWjZhd0lSZW1lQkhONHd5TVktbjB4bm9faTVXclY3eFV5d1E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaXzY0UUZaRHl1eUM4R2NyUUl5NW43SlUxZ29fdlFVRWlOa1lfQXFIZnozNm1iYWtHY0lMdUFfeGdJbk5WQWdjaVRCakZsNnVLVEFPbkNQY1hma2xrcTFhMmE1bUNyUHVqVmt6bjBXemhlUWo0OWpuSURsVnVualhQa1cxLTYzYTBDZVh2RURYbTZieUxDcjhCZ1N1aDRIYWtmTmJmTEJpdjhTSzJnU3o5SXZpTE9JT1ZYbjBaU0FMOVF4aDJiQXdLRk0ybk1aSzZnRUt3Y2ZhQmVFZkNCZz09 |
who's Ron Paul? | r/torrents | comment | r/torrents | 2008-04-17 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2c0NiQkp5MlBTeDhTSVZvUHltODlrSWlsWDg1UDVVc29WNjY5b044NEl1Uy1hZlVxQVFaVTdxeFV0OV9zaWt0Q1dsUGhTQXo5Vm5vaFl3dk9FbndvZXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaREFKX1FkeFhZVmZwQjBGT3Ixb3hobjBIZUY3czhjbHhsTVEwcFIxek5GbVViV3lVLVZiQk9YWGdJZjNLdFhaN01OcHZfSFFmMTRlT0k0OU1VaFF4MGtXRVp4N21oZUhsVmdDaTc5TXZybE52TTd1ZmEzWkhwOFpoYUIxSVJhb3NkTm5razhGeHplTVBBblNWY1Yyall3ZlhOZVhZS2hVanJ2SHZXWjE2OHFjPQ== |
π
I have just added all possible comments to this post! | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2R3k1ckxCTXIxSGVNT0UzMWZuTVZDUDE5aTNYWkU5d1VPUHJ0X0ZTWFlocmVkLS1DdDZsc3ZPM1NQdVZFMXFNZVhrLUhYb0pHTk81aWFwY0VwTDBXSXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaamRwUGtkTkhhTmtwb0FhV1V3T194VV9MemZzclBmbkI4TFpsLWJMV0M0Q0dhMWI1QUFuWk0yLVNubzFxbWdtMjlBVHJ1TDNzVHg3MlJ1V0k4ZmQzRk1wRTYwU1FJS3ExVEFBcEdQRWlPbjR3ZC02OHA1WnEwaFIwVXQ5MzJxMHZBMVBNUk9saERlZGpMUGVhS2dqeThoTDJGU0owdEh3ekxCWkh3NjA0bklaOWdsSGpYYWQwRTlqdk1hOVN4Uk9M |
>
From: ollyhardy I think Cliff's Pi idea is extremely interesting. If we put aside the goal of immortality for a second, we might consider other, more mundane uses for pi. A pi based algorithm might alllow for some unbelievably efficent data compression. Think about it. You want to copy the Encyclopedia Britannica, or a photo of your aunt, or the latest Scorcese flick? Just jump to the appropriate strings in pi.
This idea is a popular one, but it is of course fallacious. By the pigeonhole principle, we know that the "indices" of the jumps must, on average, be the same length or longer than the text they encode. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2YW8xekpNVG5kWG5QYU1lUDBrUWFwTnV6VnFlS3o3UjZXR0RBXzFNOVN0dUYyNjkyZFlDWEZWRE5Yd254YkE1cTJXWVpSSnRHcXhKNURmR2t0S1R3S1E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaZjZBcFMxTTRPVVAya1pqNlR2Y3U0R01neFVTUEFGYWtPSS0wVUt5Uk9ZeENnZ293V24wRnMyczNudXdwTmRjZHVJTElYcHZ6aWRTWWduZTdzcjFFQjlJMzNKNFpUU1p4MWNQaWpxSllxZW9TLW03NUNxaGpmVVlBTnE3bmJjelgweEtOY2NYOERaTlMxRWZMd3hlWjNSUUZxZ0xmeWpKWTlnRDRyenlEbjZOZC1HV04zWUdwYmtrTkFsbEtkR0hG |
Hey, isnt this true for any irrational and transcendental number? | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2emNOVVR1Yk1JOVd5R1RHcVk3bmxMaF85Y3lSQnRvVHVGdldKZzVDUWs2a1dWYzhITjdfQ1VLUVdIVGxCNDZFUm92QXdFSjRaQXR6QWQtd1I0S1NETlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaMmpwaHZidVBZNC1KSmtnZXZ0TFBuQm14Mk5iUVRnVVVBU3ppQWRmQVd0ZHJNLTgwXzRGU05Pd2dIT1hfRVNRTXBLMmVaN3VQYzdQajRQNlFhdGU5amRPY253eTJwcEhkbmVFelNhZW5FRF90Uk10ZUNFRnVJZDdfWldPajJ1Q0R5NkxoOGlSNEJUQktlVDJ6N0xyYld4WkMyWWxRa2F4TDU2Y3ZkaDNTVW9xVERfazlhRHFLY2prSXBqME1YQkky |
related wikipedia browsing led me to this page:
[fap fap fap](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_anthropic_principle) | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2eFR1bkUyM2NNVGJ4YTgzRVR5c2E4SDdSb1I3WjVuSDMxcS1TQUk1eHhiLWxVUmh4VVRpV0VvQmVnMXJ0MVBEZVhvWTVWYUp5TkxpUXlKWFlCQ3ZERlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaN3daSklBNlI4Q2lvVm5jTTBVS25TR2dPTGd5cnZmSVU0VFYtSmxlek9fVzV4MzRuSW5wTS1TSXBjemRmSGJPWmt1MG03QThxV3RfTlRJWFZYbjhoM1pmTTY5NzNsb0pZQWltUnNfTFYzZ3hTX2RIUmpMcTFETVRsOVJfUHRMcVROVmYtNnZvejNTeXppMmpRZXZENnV1T0lBT016TjUxSmhSLXpBNFVLalVoU21mMWJXdE5HNXdxa1F0cVlBNkV4 |
Not necessary. A number with the property of containing any finite sequence of n decimal digits with frequency 10^{-n} is called a "normal" number. They definitely [exist](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champernowne_constant) but it's not known if π, e or the square root of two are or not.
Notice that the entire original article is predicated on:
> If pi is a "normal" number, then a representation of us is almost surely in it.
And if counterfactuals didn't exist neither would that post! | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RDZ1X1hPOUJPazk3UlZNZ3U1MjY3enRvVkxMdEM5YlBaOUFQLVhQRDRUOGNvNnBDT1A5dFlOb3Q1RkdybU85X011aEhqd0FaNUp3bDVEenNITTBoYXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeFRYaURvWEhGNmE3dDl2Z01fMTlZUS1NVjZZWVA3dzRFTzVLN3FTeEtScjU5bFVqQVdTUTdKcVYzUkhQU3hkNkg4Z0t6RUNESjduajFLME5VdkExVVBHT1pjaDdxTll5WTVoUExaQ1Q4dEE4UmxkVlQzRTdHaWZfQnI5dVRCbW9VZ3Jua1RBOWNfN1dWNE5SQURfSGM4REZCMEgwQndBM3RZTGJOTEh6d2RfbjFqcS1rMlZmbi01SWtCeVdnZ2F2 |
Graham Cleverly makes the argument that I wanted to make:
>>> **Cliff:** I'm correct in saying that the entire encylopedia is in pi. So it the Windows XP operating system and Shakespeare's Julius Cesar. Are you saying I am wrong?
>
>> **Graham:** Each of those things can be encoded as a series of bytes in sequence, and the three things themselves can be sequenced. As I said, if you can do that, it's a countable number (finite in this case) - it has lesser cardinality than the digits of pi. However, the (base 16 I assume) digits of pi are calculable in sequence via one of several algorithms. For your conclusion to be true, the sequence of bytes in those articles would also have to be calculable by that algorithm, which I doubt. The set of all possible infinite sequences is of cardinality greater than |N| (it equals |N|^|N|) so there are possible infinite sequences that are not contained in the digits of pi. That set might contain all the information you're talking about, but it's much (infinitely :- )) bigger than the number of digits in the expansion of pi. (Or any other transcendent number.) In any case, you were claiming rather more than those three things. I'm not sure all the information you're talking about can be sequenced (any more than the real numbers can be sequenced).
>
> **Cliff:** If you don't think I'm coded in pi, do you think that there is a number that codes me? Also, are you saying that I MIGHT not be coded in pi or that I AM NOT coded in pi? But if I don't have to be EXACTLY coded in pi, I am probably encoded in pi. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ZkNvLTAzc3BBaUVLQmg1ak44ZVlPdGt5MHEwaW1mb015VHhzV1o4RURRTENnemEzOGZNUDV2VERKLXJSeUVNVnloazBaTS1ZZEtYdGJDZUZHaF9JQUE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeWx6bzM2WERqWU1NT3dVdl9QaC15SlZYaXRULXlSNzZWWFBkX3JLRllyNDNORFdia2VWbUJrdW45REZFNzBhVlowblROMHNveHRidmgzQWdFVFJRejhXa1Q2OWduYUQ5bFBoUTgwa2JSSnJvNGxYbDU1bER5RF96cE5vTG9ubm9YcmJ5MmJfbmw1Sm1MbWpudVo0NjVPV0VIeWhqMGtjYXpaRzE4cVkzd3FldndwRXNiazBpN29SWGdjVjJKUVpN |
i'm always up in a pie.
| r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VXpOVExuNkJYRFJYVklGZlNqRWZvelcxN1VZWmItWmZwc2tMY3RUd0d4UVJTa3ZRWEw4aTVKcE5iVHpmNjcwVEdReVB4aFA5Vk1lbUE3d1BRU290cFE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaQ1R3WEk4VmNrMEJhc05vZG5lYVZpRFdNc0pYX0dFWm5vTDhNelhRbXpjN2hiNjBFWUhBTm40d0JGelp5dW5XVENXd0RFN3R1VzdxcU02TkJxSUFURWw4MzFlLXM2dkFUdFJUUTI1VVJIanpvR1dKd3NsVGdBcnBWNmpBeFhOMm52X0NxbDgxenhEMzBCR0RwUThtaXBnNVh0TklhQ2s2ZzZ4a19mMGpWOUJwMTVkeEJJZmhGa29md0h0YlJxUXNI |
IN YOUR DISPLAY ARE VERY MANY PIXELS AND WITHIN THE UNIVERSE OF PERMUTATIONS OF PIXEL-VALUES ARE TEN THOUSAND ALL-ANGLE PHOTOGRAPHS OF ME MAKING LOVE TO YOUR MOM | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2d1lIRDF0b2RfblJrVXhjakotdVY2emFDMWN5eDViZzExV2swRjNBMXowUzl5OEZoQ3dxY3RKUUxZZjIzaXJTdU5rQjFoekF1VzIyNGlRMGZfeHJQc3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaelFwc1JuYnEwNGR2WkZ0TUx6NDVGX3hWOGVPYV80R2JGVmhaSm4wbldFUXlzYmJ2bW1rUVBSUFhzS01UbjVBLVBXT0gxRlcwTFNLMk56cmZ0d0JXc2Ezck4zV0VNVjAxTkpMVnVCVW90Y3lsMjFXVEpfUVNVWnY1RkdpZ3FuWlczX3dwSDBqWTNSckE3Skh5dHE3d0xlTlZuekhKZ1RFYlV2aGt0V05KNmh1cmVZTzFEM1pfT3R6ZHlldVhoMWd2 |
could you point me to a more detailed discussion on this topic? | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VlEwREVQck9uYkdYc3I1VHB3ZGw1RC02YV9tQ2xkdVRyUjR3cFZBRG4ydmVBMFI3MHh3MzdHZGJ2RkowTkFZUnhvZHhXWVZVbnc0NVJQbGZpakR5NXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabGt6OXA3ZUtkYlg4TEROMzI1WVRwTUNWZm1ZU3Iwb254eWJyRFNDUWh4Yk9BMFVVV3FVQVRSMENwSkVXWXB5Y2xQdkp3c1pUQWdqaDhwSXJNVTFfZnRXV0toYkZoS3VTR0wxQXFGWDRUN2ItTUwyRno2RW5fbmxtMU1yVS0wZ21PaFNXMlhXcmpzTUFKWExjdVd3VTFLT1N0cjNSMWtMVGpqTTQ0dlhhZ2FwX0VjX0JFeUppM1h3M0RFdWQ4OGNQ |
whether or not some numbers in some ratio could be interpreted to be you is not the same as saying that you exist in the numbers. Information is meaningless without interpretation. Michaelangelo said he just carved away what wasn't the sculpture... but the sculpture didn't get up and walk away (except maybe in someone's imagination). | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2NXBvYS1jTUVTaWp6Wkg0d19WRVNZbTBTYUFpQ0QwTUdaVExwQXBNbS1tWGxEQWdBanhRekxwMjhQTEpyVExGbjdWdC1BOU1sLWtQd1JjNGZ2b1BEU3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNGhjVnVoTTVmcDVMdUN5MTVMaEpmWjRpV0UxbFpoSXlMaHlxSTdPa0pKTjZoNHVCcTBwVEF0SGFaVnpUbnlyTklndXhRcHo4eXhQM3J1NU9SSVE4Uy1WMnB4cWl4alc3YV84RllrNWI5aFp1OTc2Njd6V2dLV1pGV2dHdlY5MWZ3NlRfM0dJckFmY0NFemcwQkwtRlhNTXFXNWk0M0U5QkV5V2d6YjNoQUo1U0pSc0h2c1BwY1pueDdDR0JuVXNR |
Assuming the digits of pi are normal, this can be said of any random sequence of number you can generate by any algorithm.
And yet it is asinine anyway.
| r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2TEFXRHJfZExVbFBFQ2wwMkdCQTdYLVNqUGxaYnJGRzNwQ2xZLUlNelBQOGRCMG1GZTZlSWNhaU5LOEJPcEpYelRkMS1KUnJaV3UwSHZxVVVjNDdOM1E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaUXVmLWxJWjRacFRpOFowZnhuY0hBZHFjbE5kd0c1VXVYNHE2WTdNQUU0Wkl3cTZlOTJVb0lJQVBNY1hzam11ZU82N1lnc2ZRVDI4MW1rTzZRU09tbnEyX0hUay12REJsLWIwQTRtRmJXWEljXzU3WEd3dEJPT0FIOVEtY2NvdGVteExIaE9yUXZsTXZJUU5SUlpKRnVDa041dUJVRHpQRG5mWTA5VmdsQS1YY2Y0eFFwaUY5NlRGc3lIR2tBLXpj |
Pi also contains all our evil twins.
(Also, seas and seas of infinite useless shit). | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2clpmT3o0ZlBjMXMzOHd4Y1hTR1F5Q2hwZW1YNHcyTk9UOFcydFBGQzJEZFZCX3J5cHZsQUV6aXNKcGJQbzdjWGtmTkpaZEdWdUdnZkNJakN6TTNDLWc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabUtyX2xFdko0MlUtUGpFUVdtbDVIM0otbVhNakJSNjh0NEs0bWo2MFBUeEdyUlFYbm1RMEhxdnlTT1o0cndzWXYwUHJIZi1mdDBvQ2lCSG5Fd0s1d1FSaHlTV1BBSXlpaTRnVWc5SFJHWDJiOUVmVW80VHVaX0UzN1NnWnRlVTMyRGRHOXFkazd5RkFESnNlc3ZWY2pHU3FPbWRrSVFpWndvUGhjTHFQdHZpTTBVazBmTXBEZm5paXZ2XzNmYTdx |
Not unless somebody computes all of them (infinite time/space complexity, natch), and the dust hypothesis is true. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VldGQlQ4enV3dGl5TUpSb0NMQVVjRHZfeVpIZ2VKOGg1V0MzM2drX3lzb0tuVkdCZFhHdzU0WTBfUnJ1TmhMdW9qN2J1MzRtTFB6UUptSk0xemhKWkE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaMGpseGg3ejJ2MFZjVE1qX2dWbkRBR3BDZjV3UXl4aldyWlpYd0xTVXhEUDBjZE5nMXBSNHJfYVlDdjFpdURlalB1STdTNjdVbWk2TFphWk1QT2xmMTZMY2V6Zk44YkYySlN0aENLMzFYaGN3a3JxdnpXbHBWRTFtd2pPZ2tZMDhsdTEyMjUzYXlMSFZZU2J4dW1RdEl0RUVITHAxYy1CZUFWb0hDcjZvci1BTWdVQTNFZUZtVl9pWkVRbnFQbkd3 |
I don't believe that the cardinality of the infinity for the repeating decimal expansion of pi is large enough to encode mutliple quantum states, each of which requires the same depth of precision as pi. Pi is not big enough to represent more than one quantum state.
In other words, pi is not big enough to encode a person. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VWxJU0o3M3lmVzBIQW1HdnhscTUyWmU0MHptQnBPZmRDX1RLWDZEVVBnSENvdG1SOFhUN1hfQ2xWa2MwSGZiRnlLTGdwVFc1U3ZJbDRadkdIdUJid2c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNXRyT05xSXUwNlBHRFVZTm1jN2t5a2EwQnY0S09CUDlJN1lpTEVlckZaYW1pYnJhc1VvZndNODU5ZDV3OERQZDhtZ2VsZHBFT3NZdTJ5WnNzWFEzRHFJMk5EY0gyYVdLRVZNaVE0aTc4Slk1cEc5ZndNc0RNbzlQdWpKd240WjIwdzY0V1B0RzJ5c3A2SWZZTXdRbDAtd3lpR2ltRURaWVhKVkdfZkt6cnBoVjhsV1BsVTdSLW5FU25RU3A2OFdm |
Mod this one up, folks! It's the only post so far that actually gets to the point.
Usually I think that math is fun and everybody should do it but when I see "articles" like this one I wish there was a math license. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2QWNYbUtzTjN0cmM5TUdaeURwSkw1M3JtczlBLVh1bFd5QzY2MnpOd1Zna2U5Wkl4LUdCSmR3NGF3ZWJ4MzBMblRCMnlDRElYVFQzMnNtbG9HMC1CdXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdacmk2NEJ4bER1MXZjc0Q5dkIyTFh5TS1ySW52SUMwS3V4dnBjNF9tbjI2dGZjU2tBdmU5M2RORzU1UGFQT0VEVkxQNy1ETUE4MUVvSlA3WnBxRWlGNE5qRW5xX0tBNTVZUWoxLTNpRWhBQktnalVtM1dqa0E4RzB1QmNQRnRyQWxEYmwtSXhGdUd6WC00R3NJWGN1bkt2ZGpFb2lKQU9OdUJzeWtrSWZvR25iem1Mc1NGN3JpaHpkS3BMVVRLR3l3 |
I haven't seen it discussed before, but it's a pretty easy principle to demonstrate. Say you want to "compress" all possible two digit numbers by replacing them with their index in pi. There will be some savings in terms of digit counts for some numbers (31 maps to 0, 14 maps to 1, etc.). Others are going to be uncompressed (58 maps to 10, 89 maps to 11). However, there's going to be some numbers that require a 3-digit index.
There's some opportunity to get some compression if we're mostly using sequences that are representable by the shorter sequences (that's the basis for Huffman encoding, a technique used in some compression algorithms), but with the "randomness" of the digits of pi, we've got no guarantees that representing some large piece of data like the Encyclopedia Britannica with an index to pi will provide any compression (i.e., the index may be so astronomically large that representing the number accurately takes more memory than just storing the encyclopedia as text). | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2XzdORHhYM0ZaZ2xzQnpVN25xaE0zMGhuUEMyNUQtVkFINkdTTE5vTzh4ZVBXTEFncWhaMHJnRHlOQjZDYThDNnZrRWFnaHVXcGM5Ti1kWkxkLUtMZlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabXJnS1VENUNRYzRUV2ZqZlZrUVJwem9sM1pEa0staVFrTUxfbXUwUEdTZUlHWmpQTWNsd3VzNzN5SWFVZUh5S3FERzRYVlhtV0FZVHZOak5sbVROSkpXdjkzMWVBbUxlRUwzUF9wa0Z5bkJXei01Z3BQTEZOdVpucGx4d2pSX04xUUVOUGhtTVFyYkJCTnpGN2hzQlRuVTlPQWQzXzRHOUdLb0RURTdacU9rVF9UOXZKbUlabE1yaWVXMFBxMUow |
Wow this is dumb. Yes, there are certainly sequences in pi that *could* code for all our life experiences, etc., but where is the universal machine that would *execute* pi in exactly that manner? Uh, nowhere.
Plus, if there's sequences that encode a happy eternity holding hands with a loved one, there's also universes where you're living in a cardboard box and Rush Limbaugh is dictator-for-life of the world.
Eternity cuts both ways. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-06 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ZGZXaVVhLXpSYmY5WHFnSkRIaXdWbE44LXNSWmNUMVVseW1JTnNJVlNHcGE5UjlxbUFPaGFlZk5kMDJpenpaeVdJaXlqLUhjb0pPOXJwSExidThWUWc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaTDQ1cUJIWHg4VDFMeUV5ZElTNUQxUkVqcXZETEZTVk44TlV5OC0zMG1vdVpRMUdUY3dLNTJVUTA1VkhyZUxOcEVPVUZRU3Q0bUVqY0tmLXp3Y2k2WW0xNVIxVEhfV19IVS0zU1g4WHFtbmV5cUUwRlR3c1E0WXFJcy0td1FfV3VBYWtVd1ZUSzZXUVcwZHRMRWVHa19fWGk5bUNpSVJRRUI2U3FVWDJWdWNHcEVtWlJ1UVQ2ekZ4cGwycGpsZlVM |
This is embarrassing of both the Creationist AND the author of this blog. Math doesn't say jack shit about how the world works. It is simply a limitless source of very useful methods for modeling the world.
Unlike religion, which gives no useful model about what's true. Religion is useful for other things, of course. But the point is this barely qualifies as a meaningful debate in either realm. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2Tk1aV0F0NEF3VzhkMDhUVHMtc2xnbFlGUE9SaVJScWNSb2E2QmZzMHNwQWU4Um1NMFVOY1U2N3Ixa0ZDODhZYWZ4QjQtZ0FmbVJLSnFGb0FlZnp6TVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaOFJuTGZaVVJqU3dTZWwxV1pTTURuRGh5d3h1RDRnMmtjcGs0VUNuZkhzS01FeGE1c1EtTUs1TVlxanNlbnAtYU04Z21Jdm56ZUhvZGtJdmVCd0VNV1ZjbXJrQk83Q09UeVBzNGd5eXFYM0xMcUhaN2ZjUE9GdEtfMTc3VDhsRjFnU1ZGRzlKSTBQNFFKU3lqLU9BbzBUNEdVZ1ZZdXBIanE0Qk1Ram5jcDV2Um9rcWlwcHpfYV9tNGl5cXhwdzg0 |
Wow, look at those two go! They're gonna win the Special Olympics for sure! | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MWRjTmNHc1lkZWpDcV9hZnAxQ0k4QVlKMnZxWWw4ZHU0VklkQXg1cl9FNUdJMWE1MWNIckpqRHRLanIwR2hhbXVSWGVxR2RSb01yM0FGM19tc0FVVWc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaQWxhM284ckZVajkyVXlNdnFhb1ExNzFvR3BNQkxNcDl0WGJyOHZEWWJCQWdXU1k4OUFoUTNlbXB1RlhId0tsZlhVYzlQM2tNSnlidTAxWnFNYjBReWdkZ2NRbnJoYVRRbGZQcjhDR2ltMEJ4RDFTWDFYSmFvNEFiMmYzaW9FVDM4UzV1bW5qcGh2dHBsT2dZcXVTMWdqZ1U5SnItOE9WR1d2d1c2OGk1NUtZbzhMY0VNQjAxVFQtY0NtRmlaQmUy |
No, it makes sense that the creationists are arguing this - they're trying to argue that it's mathematically impossible for the universe to have existed forever, therefore it must have come into existence at some point, and therefore(?) there must have been a Creator.
Their argument, however, is retarded. First they throw in an irrelevent factoid about infinite series. Then they presume that they could go back in time to T = -infinity, as if infinity were an actual number. The author of the blog counters them with ease and they keep stumbling around making weird claims about math.
So the Creatonists, as always, are idiots. The author of this blog is personally invested in the argument, and I'd guess that's the reason why he bothered to put the post up. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2NFJsMUJMSkRIeVhMZVFTWEl3bTRsLXRYencydFQ4OVhudGZEU3pmalAtSzV0b0JpWWRjUDl2cTNLSnpIV0hYQ2hPSzV2UXRjWnNhTUQ2MXBibkZRT0E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaRXFpMTduS0haOXdGYVNaTUJ4X2FSRGI3cWxWblRjRVlIUU9sZk51TEpGTkp5Y2tDdmZFMm9tYWcyNGtZTDlFZ0oyTDFQM1FGdUliRVc3YlJZSkFhbXRjd0FORnhMbEw0cGVJTGV5ZkRrV1dEc1VHeW1qcWdtdU1qZmRteGJfM0p5R3NaMzNPTzRlLTJXUUt1RDloVTJSaEJMeEtIVUpRRVNKdGlNUUxRdm80MDdTcDlUaXJwOWFRdFVqckg3WW5G |
I really don't think it is.
It gives me the same impression I get from new-agey types that claim that quantum physics is responsible for destiny or free will.
At some level some, there is a conceivable relation between the two. But the complete lack of understanding of even the most fundamental concepts of the subject reduce their theories to absurdities. In this case, how many different formal and rigorous senses are there for "infinity" in mathematics? Most laymen just think "infinity's infinity, and you can't count that high" but anyone who's study mathematics for a few years at the college level knows there are tons of different kinds of infinity. Infinity as the limit of a sequence. Infinity as the compact closure of the reals. Infinity as what happens when a senior in high school divides by 0 on his precalc test and wonders why he gets marked off on his test.
In this case, it seems like infinity is being used in the sense of unboundedness, that given a real function and two points in the domain, the difference in their images are finite. That's my impression of this argument, at least. But some points to note. First, it feels weird bringing that level of accuracy into the conversation, because there *was* no accuracy to begin with. Just pointless, baseless debate. Second, the mathematical statement, if my understanding of their ramblings is correct, is largely irrelevant. Who knows how the universe began. I'm sure some scientist does, but that the scientific-based truth is so poorly understood, even by laymen eager to understand that it suggests that a few dorks on the Internet blogging angrily at each other could not possibly understand such a technical subject.
There's an old saying that I saw once on the profile of some random guy on Starcraft's battle.net...
"Argue with an idiot, and he'll bring you down to his level, and beat you with experience." | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2N0RiZDJzX19OWF9pZXFLM2xrVi1JSTgxMldQY1ZvWURxSGNlV1k2elpYMFhNaEVPbS1LNU1FNENIMkJNZU4wLVljVWhmQ055bTNoVEYyOUdsSEVPMlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaSC15WUVNQmtUcnFqWGMzLUJ5ZDhkZXZObzdCUmM3TlR5ZDYxTW5NSXh1Rms0NkVNZ1ZySlZvUTZWaTRrdHdlNjNiV002bXprSUk0a25QeGVjZzZfU1NVSm1tdFJNN3Q3SGV5dHpvQm1XVDV0ZUNlYmEzZGFLSno4b3JHUktvT2hRbDQ2a0tlVXZhYmxuRmJXc0ZmaEtWRDhKOWJ6bEVBS0FpRURDZ0ozTUdGZWZnYWJ3bEJXNWNaLW0wNFlHemN2 |
I'm reminded of an Einstein quote:
>So far as the theories of mathematics are about reality, they are not certain; so far as they are certain, they are not about reality. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2NUs2UlBGekotRlJyS0Zvd0tmRWloUjhUemtBM1BmZFAtX25nMmFmTjd4LS11YV9qWVJjckVFMWpKWjBoRjlJckZuRzJxVTVSNURsbHJVei0xa0VLeXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaRlUwUVlzaWlyTm9QM20wXzRDbjRxRG9JWHB3NjNmN3FpXzRSaXZZUjhMQjhEQng4Wm9sNW8ycFQ3MklkcVU5YTRTR3RhejNjeUVaV0pETUI0S0wtaTM2MGxMOTFEQUpaWGp1ZHZsMk53blQxdmpxZk93Y0s5QlhLMXpVWjgzWUsxUllrNmlQYnR0LWNuVnhUdlgxRFZjMnI4UmJQRDZZOE1pSjlsS0VEQnVwOW15V3NzVTZPcnFoVjgyakZYT0pO |
I have to go with the creationist for this one. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ME1aVVB5eXVCeVFJMVNYVVR2WjVWb0d6TXg2M2hhTTQ3NjRSYjlfemp5Ql9iLUhSYU5FMlNXNjk2SFRUV2FfWDVRM1lOUnBmZklXYTI2enpRS2Fkd3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaOEtTTXE4WlhkOVRORTFwN2pZWGxqcnNWNGxZUVNYdTNGRlExbXpsQ2NmZGNXRjMtcC1sMkFzNGw0N1NjeThPc1FmcFBhR0tXLUNlNnN5TThBYUpyVE14dEJ4V1R1ZUh6S2ZtU1VaT2VCR1BqUXY3VUt5MlVhekg0bE5zZkFNRnoxTnpUZGNkQkhkZUxjVzRzVHl1dXpjSms1NTBMd096bHV4elFzSXNXQ1dubWJVUWtIb0VVMDZheXliTUNFeV95 |
To paraphrase a quote by a wiser man than I: Creationists use the sciences much as a drunk uses lampposts, for support rather than for illumination. They don't actually care about the evidence unless they think it somehow supports their case. If they cared about the evidence, they wouldn't be creationists. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2NXFIaHZJU2Y5c29hU0RyVzFTRGc0R3hQcFc5WWFnTlh5Mi1DZUVKbHpXcmREUXhsUXlpdU41MHBvcmpGaVRZMTR6V1d5LXc2NkQ4YXU1bnNvbnhIRXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaZFd5ejExb1lVODZWQ2NoUUNRb09tc3E1NkNlZ1UzNk5EY2k5YXVmNWdYdG9TbmRYVlI0WERaYU5xcnFFQUJucXAwZlM2NjZKVWdYX3hvQlJqR011ZGIyZnpXQ0lrR0I1QUFsVGpRSXV4RFVzV1ExVVNIcmZGYlJFLVQxMmtfWFBSX1pMbGhGeWtwLS1HODdnUlNweWFZWU1MMkk0YWMxbU8wVjctLXk5NjhYbHdlYkJpY2JlcmtNU1ZVLTN5RkhG |
That is a good one also! Mathematics is a quantitative reasoning system built from premises, and it's application is contextual. If the context is there, mathematics can be very powerful. Without the context, it is just beautiful. Modern society is becoming more mathematics friendly, a lot thanks to the use of computers and electrical engineering and all their byproducts, that feed into the environment that empowers mathematics even more.
Mathematics leverages what is already there. Mathematics leverages itself. It is a good system to build on. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RGlRcFdhSmFpUWtUOWc4TmJBVXMwbjRGYy10VHpBQUpIdklCZzBya2s2aXdBajBlZU5fYmVDWnZnUjE0WkxTZzNuYkhkcUFDXzBnaGtpSThQVklnTmc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaMjQ5Qy1yQTRBNklYUkNXbXExUkxCNFN4ZS02N0d6X2JBclI0c0Fld1U3ZVJOOU1xSWVCR2NVNUtkdkdyV0NYVVBQU05QTHVuSWk1cnhNUDFhU1pSNlB1SjRYYXByNEFoQm1DZm9IRFotLTJZNGtITFpsUXE3X09qdWE4OUYzVUJGYXpjbVBoZWZzdVdJd2huUWx5eUJiQTNTOUNnTzVuc25YN3U5eEExYi1TQk9VallTNEljdUxCZTd0UEJ6Qkhz |
I'm not exactly sure what you're disagreeing with when you say "I don't think it is" at the beginning of your post.
I don't entirely understand what they're arguing about, anyway. Now that I've gone back to Craig's post, I think that Craig, Durston, and Shallit aren't too clear what they're arguing about either.
As far as I can tell:
Creationist Craig makes an argument by authority, citing a paper where Hilbert guessed that nothing in nature is infinite. He uses this to claim that it is not "turtles all the way down", that if A is caused by B is caused by C, we eventually get to God, who is the First Cause.
Creationist Durston cites Hilbert by way of Craig to argue that mathematics requires that the universe had a beginning.
Shallit counters this and talks about infinite sequences. Shallit cites the infinity of the natural numbers and the density of Q.
Durston misinterprets the sequence 1/n as a series; then he claims that the infinity of the natural numbers is a real number.
Anyway. They're talking about the beginning of the universe because we don't know much about it and therefore the "God of the gaps" can leap in and necessarily exist.
I like Shallit's 1/n example of an "uncaused beginning", but it's a shame that it gets buried in such a bewildering mishmash. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MDNMY2NGcU1kdWFldHVGb0EtRWFvSjBPUm5rQVZyYWtSVExwa2NLZzY2ZkFuTnlUZmpaVGczV2JVZVhnalJHR2w3TURjZER2MDA5eGRONVNEVWR5V0E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdadkhwdGl1ZWtmLUhxUk9hajdZY3dYeWNnTlBTRFcwT1dVM2twdmNBb0l1M3ZZX1VxR0tpZHhfVjZtU1NZeWkyeW8tU3U1SWZ2ZE9Bd3RUWFpaZlkwejVuRkk0YV9rRlFJWG5iMENhcHNWdUZ2Z1dNZk5kV2tLcVp6c2YtclJoS0toS1MyRXQ2b0NmenFfYnFtYWVPS1FadUY5c2MySWxfLXVTbzhrNFA3NHhZVFdBcm40bnFEZmdjN250Z3NJMFpk |
Hah. I don't remember what it was I was referring to when I replied "I don't think so". | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-07 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2SXh6R2NDeFpwU08wTmM0RElWTkNkZmM4UU9fdzVoejY3a0lmMDhaOThWVjVsRVo3YUs4SUk4T3JySGpmd2lxNFYwVEhSS3Y2dE9hQzJKVUxJaUNJLVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaM0hCM3R6SkF3cFBuY2pTeXVTeVJJU1dJWUUyM2oxcnlDaXo3d1ZnU0RSUERjSDZrV3h3V2JoSERfTmcwTnpNcUsxT1JGOHhleUZYWmpYM0xIRWpOTDMwbEFZcjFtbFhtT19mN2hScVhqa3dnS1ViYXlmNXlYZjhVaGlVbGhYZkVuTzAta0VKQXVtVkdCTTV0RGkxb24wbFBTMThNSTNpLW5YTi1IYVV2eXZydFBsVG1jX0tqSk02a1JsbWxhRkdL |
Please pardon the self-linking. I'd like to know what people on Reddit think, especially those much more skilled and knowledgeable than me. Do you agree that society has fundamentally mis-categorized math? | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2R0RBNU5SZ0c4UHd0blE5MDg4eVA4YWNkUUlQcjV2NURITXFjZ0FFQ1dCSEE0R19pMk1iNUlrVG9CTUx6d3ZzYmplc0lDMWVUWWpVdmNScW9CRWx2dnc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabnM5bTdtdEZHUklMSndDS2tSTWF1STVrYV9ScndGakNFaHZ3dWZMVi0wTXo3Q2ZoZEh2YTZrdzFaV3h5TGNBVG9ZeWthMFdhS1JfRVgyelRycTB5WmYzRzVmNlZtMU9Kb2xXV01sTmZKU0hRbXJ1Y1BPUzNUSm5nRWg4eTZ2M01RSi1LLUNUZDlBN2VuOTJnRGJEOVJRc3V2WWs5a3A3SmRtQUhSVmRLOHZUakNCNU1Hc1FwUXNaMld5YkdseDNU |
[deleted] | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2dXJjZlVCaXRwWFhTdWs4c3N1VmktMy00Q3pueXRmcktBVEZMZGZJMWoxcXJ6VWh5Q1dCd3RPRlRsS0ZrMmhRVkFCbGtsN1BxTTdSdXlfeHlHZnlZZFE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaa2d4X3VWYzhiQWtlXzBkbWI0VHNrZU1fV3BRR0wtVkRRcDdxQ3psZ2ozZmlIbko0T1gzYmVOZUdGeG1yYmhsV2tMb01hY0ZRR2RLTXNYOXdsc2pVYjhRcGZoOHlYVktKTndmWmQzRU5ELUhKaWRhMXh1YWl5RWZhVkR0bnZFekdIbE1hTWJoRW44dk52dmdxcTdaYl80YVNFZmJSYVlOaWZSYzB5OUtIVUZFNEhIZWhpcE8zUC04MWdTeEdwTzR2 |
I don't mean to be a twat (but I'm aware I will seem one), but perhaps it's slightly helpful for me to point out that it should read *nor a "tool"*. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2bXpDblo3RTJMTmkxMUJsYjNkdF9CTjR6Z0VJY01kbTZvYktTdU90V0VNRTFOT2wwZHpuQllXSVdNODVvMGtiSnljdXhmYWl5SUJBMU1jR1I3NjdGZkE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaMmJKN2FQbktqR3BVTzg1N25qbXpueEtEa3lNQ0J6c3NaWGFfVHNUYzBrX0hvM3NfXzFqRTJ0TmRDYS1lY0JTQVVmLXhxbENkNXhpenBmb3cxU2h6Q2hWZXJRbXpqNld1dVZGaGJZM245VXNqYjNfbUlqQ2Jrb21Dc2dlYlJtT09ZbG8zbDJ2eDVEVkZvRnY0NG50QVhvYUJuaVZfa1hhR1BVZmZhdm5hUHJ1TVFwZ1VTaDBVbTNlb2tOQngtSmNk |
> Do you agree that society has fundamentally mis-categorized math?
Yes. Furthermore, I even agree with your controversial point that "Math is the exclusive totality of reason."
However, I think that we seriously disagree on some of the finer points. In particular, I think that there are many things besides mathematics that make us human. No other species produces art, for example, or records history.
My own feeling is that mathematics is a sort of art, in which the expression of the reasoning intellect is sublimated. A correct proof and a great piece of music feel similar in the sense that no note has been misplaced. Moreover, both are seen as having a value that cannot necessarily be measured in economic terms.
If you haven't read Lockhart's Lament, you should do so; it's the best commentary I've ever seen on math education.
>I can’t prove it, because I’m bad at math.
I am extremely good at math, once in the top 4 on a test taken by over 200,000 people. And I am quite certain that the power you are ascribing to mathematics simply does not exist. Anything that is not stated in rigorous mathematical language has no proof or disproof, so we can never find a place to stand where the whole world appears to us in purely mathematical terms.
It has always been my observation that those who try to think about mathematics only in rational terms doom themselves to failure. There is no human mathematician without a strong intuition that will allow him to make highly accurate guesses about whether a theorem is true long before he is able to prove or disprove it.
>The post-humans themselves will think in math exclusively.
I hope not. I value friendship, love, and music far too much to give them up for mathematics, however much power and beauty it might contain. In any case, as I said above, I do not believe that such beings can exist. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2M2tDcWc4Zk9fVEN4NGQybXY0MTNKUVpjT0dVQ1hlMUJaYkZsOGR5cUVxVEpYbE1pZ2FBclZ1U1NrZGRNYkJPaFpWS3BBVDhWSG9iQjc1RlU1LUV5T0E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaTUVMSDF2U0haOUFEWk1ISk9peWtZWC1WOUlJem1JbGhNTDNpeV9qWnB4b1ZBdDY2VGZVdUVrVHFBWk00cnZUU3l5blJEUUdaQjFSVDRVM3U5UzlpUUlUUVFoOXlnazdrejRDWFUwTGg0MmRHQ0hkRzVmNWI1RjU0eHdscDhvUnlzM19kY0tERHVodXFwNFVtbFVMVGNaNmdWdHlYS1lPUEpTNUtyVmtVcTh1R3JxWkQtaWg2NlJaWDM3Tk9mMHNr |
That's pretty picky grammar. Spoken English allows "not...or" and boolean ¬(α ∨ β) has the right truth table ;-)
Also, Unicode is fun. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2anExbUtTMVpMYTkyWjBlZEI5YXdmVzkwTEVVbTlyc3VrUmdMYS00cDREU1NSWUdiOUNjZ3U0ci1MMWNxTXo2WXhuTGJyTTd1U3phaFRjUUxya3RrYUE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaMVdDYTdKbzNMdnBDa2xwd3lvTjlKeEtDN1dCZXVyM295T2Y0dzZxX1hNR1lfaWxhOXFLR1daU2lGZXpiaVRTZ3MyUS12OEg0ZldTRFE0YnJXa3JWYlIwZHlCaURnc0M4cnF4SEdYN01md044Y3FlRGpCWFV6QzJ6RTZYOHk3NFFVdlF1aEVTYUJnUXNLeGdYeDhBVTh3ZTBzSWFxTG1NSGIzRi1BUjdRcGxCamsyNUg4cDRtVFZQVHI0MXFYd2hl |
>The is juvenile bullshit.
The is a pretty juvenile response.
> The true wisdom of life consists in reconciling the mutual contradictions between fields of human endeavor
I assume that this includes calling other people's ideas "bullshit" without raising any specific criticism. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2aWFJUWpsTm93eTBObDhXak04b2dUV056eUVSdWJiaW85X1E5cDdvRnJIcS13Sk1RcjNPcEdPcFAxcmxiS2lpNkhGZjBiMmktZTd4eEpvdVpnQWgtRGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaQTVCXzVKX19IWTlFVWxsdWlHSVJTUzdJZ0hULWFGTmZxaVNFOTBkd0VWYzJha2dwdmVTeUNJRDVLUFgxTnZCcFVJTFRJWmtfMDRFZU80eU9mbW0tOUU3TXlCWUV0NGxocDZKMDJwVUdaWUNCcGFTNjRnR2lnajVVQWJMbzNRS1BzdllXTmFTaHRheGtDenhoSHpJQXhMd0hpOHFNT2QyN1NfczVuMFNrNldDR1dsLWNMZk9nVVFvVE4ydjI5bERu |
I agree that our teaching of math in the US systems is encyclopedic and not algorithmic by nature, and therefore a conceptual understanding of math is beyond most students simply because of the format it's originally presented to them in.
However, math is not the end-all. See [Gödel's incompleteness theorems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems) | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2Zlp4SnU2aTdGM0lGcExYZ2Z1N1VJSlREM0FJUGZ3YjJkMXo0TzJEOXdEZFhXdWNfTm1lTEtodlgwWktkblVweG9pYXNHUVRRVTVXNkxrWlZQMS1PT3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaS0hMeF9KdGotc25BalpBcmo1MDVsN3hSVXg0bEtZWUtQbnpwUW1SLURJQnZQZ0Rkajhsd3huUWdGeDF5RXgwTUlucHVDeVVTa2NKSC1iamo4VU9qTWs0elo3Q0UwNXRURVF1UEV5bThNcTVlV2dJS0ZlUVJEaGVBT25qRW9Eck1ZNWd2WEJiQklGM09yc3VUU0lPNXV0aW16NnZWbUpucTR4QzU2MzZVa3FQbk9KS3kwYTdMVUV0bEVKUF9PUEtE |
Math is a language of logic. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2S1NyY3VyeDJTVzhodkluWjVVOVlURUFldUZjZzhCUHRZSm83ZEs1eV9RRGs5VmFsaXJkajU3amlGMlRzWVE0OXVBeGhCVTFyLVBOUnY3RUNlemktWGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeTA4N3FrQ2dNVUlIVGJiNy00OG15SkZpaGs1VlFNREVzUUF3bm5fMWZEZ0RlX1JkUnlsOC1GSHlBakM1WnVjdHNCVlRod3hiVHlGbUU0ckhhT0F3NG9rS3ExSWxhMTF6Tkw0alJJR21PT1hReEFqMFJlc1UzT1F1QU0xYUJucWtKcVZlazNTR1ZqMEJ5SW12dEFUVXBZbHlZUnBscy15TXJvSlNwVjFFSlFJS0E0eVdCZ3N1VGJXYk12MnVmTEp5 |
> Anything that is not stated in rigorous mathematical language has no proof or disproof, so we can never find a place to stand where the whole world appears to us in purely mathematical terms.
See Eliezer Yudkowsky's series on Bayesianism and evidence on the Overcoming Bias blog, and the concept of Solomonoff Induction, which makes formal an epistemology that ought to generate an approximation to reality which can provably not be bettered. (Although it can't be perfectly achieved either - it's not computable.)
> There is no human mathematician without a strong intuition
Psychology describes the "system one" of the brain, AKA the subconscious mind, as a very fast cache-structured computer. That *is* intuition. There is no magic, there is only meat. And meat can be understood, generalized, improved upon..
> I hope not. I value friendship, love, and music far too much to give them up for mathematics
I was being imprecise. I don't mean they would be emotionless in some "Mr Spock" way. I mean they would conceptualize in math (and emote in relation to those concepts). What *better insights* can you get about friendship, love and music when you apply mathematical thinking? | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RlMyME1ucGNfOWdBTXRXVmJsY0s3cXpFM0Jzd2tsdWRMczF3SjB1c1Zka2Jpdk9JQ0NsYlQ0WUNURG4tYXRCdGgyNTE5OTFSSWMtd1JKNjJDOXJSWEE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaTmhscGwxRmdjSklPbTQ1YUU5RU84X3dJT0VhYWFrZEhGd3hEVWktWVhsVXJBZUlpU0JsQVpSZVZTRkkyNWhRQXlCUW16QWZCSzh5Z0JsdTJyV040UlZlWHJqVnk4SFd3VXFXWE1kSnV1aXV3Z0dZcjZGVkViSHVCa1h4M2VQZV9tM09KS2F3Q1F6Rk1NeUMzYThuNDNRZGllSTRWV2VlejNBSldwZ19ndWJBVjZSLXFpY1poTmVYaWhnT0lyLVE2 |
Leaden and uncreative? Poor child, you know not of what you speak do you? | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2UVA2NzdoSElpNWxEVlF2Z0E0dTVGT2hzTUlHX0hPZDRja2swazhNWkdxRS02dThWM1RXU2NvcXdyX3RpOE9heHBJalJVaXBHbXduSTRSeG5ZMGtuS0E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaQzktUktycGRzdnBIZng4WmZ0OVpWU1JxbVE3Sm85Q2FxbklvQk54ZkRmQUFhbFpnbmZqSEFiWjhSVVo5ajZ0ZVpEYndNcXFGSlFWVTQ3QWhqSWJfeGlENHBjWU1rV2VYYWpzWVlWWHU1eE9qTUIxS0hlaVhOa0RkX3daeEhtVUlabEJTWFNHV1F3VFdxMjB1OF9zeUo0QUN0MlFpenBYcHY5NUFGTWhkWks0TUVvbS1FN09oZUlfeDExWUZfVGRM |
...Nor is Math a political philosophy. What you are espousing smacks of monomaniacism. You are advocating discarding a plurality of viewpoints to avoid failure but [liberty](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/) is worth risking failure to keep. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2T0FIeU9oVk1JdXVnQ1dLYmZ3RDAxS1VjZTFxd2lNaGVlZ2kzV19TWDlENnlwWEpKQ1gzT3BmZ3JjOV9mRjJ2Mzk2cU1vTVZOTFp5RG45UnVqVDRWTUE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaT3dWa0pYc1Y1eGFoMV95bENZeW13S2tDM3pWMWwtcTZRaUhiYndiUUo3VzBmenpOZ2VOY0FWdU8tMUltc3ZEa29rMXkxb3JldWxXU1BNSUFNSEI5dHYza1A1dzQ2Z2FEdjNDMEI0cUJxNU41TVk3ZDhpdjkxNTVWNGxXOTMweWlWQmRZQjRUOGd4UjJKaGowNkJBaDNqekdYeUpMajdwNDlVeGtoWTFfRTY1MVZTWTMwSmFTWnNNUUthdVRjdFN1 |
> When post-humans look back on humanity, they will recognize our math and our thinking built upon math as our only “people” achievements.
You took a good thesis about three steps too far with that one.
Rationality is all fine and dandy, but it's only part of what makes us human - as innumerable Kirk/Spock dialogues attest to.
When post-humans look back on us, will they admire our utility of reason and mastery of mathematics? Perhaps they will. But I think they'll also admire our fundamentally irrational drives and determinations that will ultimately be more responsible for reaching post-humanity in the first place - that thing inside us that makes us climb the tallest mountain, fly to the moon, create works of art, pursue knowledge and master reason for its own sake. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2dkFybjE3dUhaQ1dSOGtiemRuMllfblBja2FBUC1WY2xDY2F4dVpIbnh0Rkx6dF9aZGpPLTN3YVE1Q3lSenctcGhqYjRMUkJzOXVKczJpa2J6TnVya2c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaZXJsS09RZzlvbEVXemxLdVVYMWE4eDhJXzYzaTBHLVVlcVh6YnVfRE5NcDdZV3YxX3MtU0otYlVvN3dWbm9DSUFob1lkYm02NmduZF8wdTd1SnJHTHRTQU1hVlRRUXZjNnlLOWltNnJGeGNmV2dYRHFFWnc0dk9tZ2ljbjlhdy1MelpxTWQzWWFhdFlWOEpjV2pzS1VaWGtNUThpa05xOURmWXRRalMzTUttTUtEdU81MmlnTUFkWVNUSVF0Slc1 |
> See Eliezer Yudkowsky's series on Bayesianism and evidence on the Overcoming Bias blog, and the concept of Solomonoff Induction
If you think that the existence of these mathematical theories proves *anything* about philosophy (I have never heard of "making formal an epistemology" in any math classes; perhaps you would care to provide a formal definition of the term) then you really seem to me to be making the same fundamental mistake that the "intelligent design" folks make when analyzing so-called irreducibly complex protein systems to find evidence of a God, namely misinterpretation of scope.
I could easily start talking about Kurt Godel, for example, to point out the things that can go wrong with self-referential mathematical systems, but doing so to make a philosophical point would be a non-sequitur, and additionally would oversimplify and cheapen the actual mathematics.
> Psychology describes the "system one" of the brain, AKA the subconscious mind, as a very fast cache-structured computer.
I would not be surprised if there was one psychologist somewhere out there who talks about this, but the idea that psychology as a whole sees the brain in this way is simply not true. You are continuing to cherry-pick science that supports your philosophy.
>What better insights can you get about friendship, love and music when you apply mathematical thinking?
Mathematics is formal proof, and love and music have as little need for formal proof as a fish has for a bicycle.
Of course, if, as you say, the brain is really just a computer, then we all *already* behave rationally and mathematically and there is nothing to complain about. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2TjM4cEd6b0dfRU5MNUtTcjhZeGhIcTdsaXdfSzM3VFpvUzIzcVlpb0MyT1VjdDlmQmNwcVNxN1FjRjhXVTFZb1gzbnVWZk5MM0ppOE13U1g1N2ZQQUE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabkc4RE91RFRiNWowcXlQQXEyNmVjZUtucnVvVjVPOEtReHQ3R2pJVTBsSGowOXZTVnpoOWVmc0d5QTNnRzVJWE1FZnVERklFYWpwNHFHb3FnaXB6OW9JbnlFVGdrN3ZzNGhpZHgzd0NYcVZLV3NsTlBrN193YmdzQmVpVl8wWUdveDFSdEtRd2UwUWg4c0ppeGd2azBNbl9JQjg2NmdFX2FCdk9XU3dKWXJMV3Y1M0N2YVhUSXNzTVJRM2xWRDZp |
> A correct proof and a great piece of music feel similar in the sense that no note has been misplaced.
Interesting, given how much that great piece of music relies on underlying mathematical relationships. Notes, quarter notes, transitioning from one frequency of sound to another.
The same is true for all great art. Shakespeare is filled with iambic pentameter. Compositional "rules" for art and photography all talk of fractions and ratios. Much of what we find beautiful in nature (vs what we don't) has elegant mathematical concepts at its root - phi, fibonacci, symmetry, etc.
So I think there's some truth to what you say about intuition. The human brain is strongly attuned to mathematics intuitively (judging by what we find beautiful), far more than it is rationally. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2R3VHTzU4OW4zQTJ0ZTVCZHhNQkVMcGpmZGJKNERaeWh1dGR0UWY0aExIcGNDV2RxNEZIQ042RFd2V3J6d1BKLUlDeUhDS0ZFbnowRWp3OGZaY092aVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaS1Nwa21lNVBZV3JRTnNadzlqeVpFNFlybl9OTDdjcnF2NzZPdjdkWnlHZjQtN0tCZ0NQOGtXb0x2WVlrak91c3VzXy1lRC1vZThnYzZJY1UzNGJEUENFcUNnN0hRcmJ5TWRvMkdOa3FxVjFsYnZmbkFTME1XeExjZlBUeGhHWjRBeUdmSTdILTJCVmFlS25pWjN1cnBVbkY1NkZLaHhzSS1ZbUlHMGstUUJuNGJSSm5WVnMwQzFXbnZ3QjdTRWVt |
[deleted] | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2bU1OZm1zT21sSWg0bWgyd0d0OXZKY2F0ejRyWGcwOFRPQW9KZE5oNUZNWUcyX21LR3diU2pEQlNsRzQtWDYwLVdvSWNzamZIbDJUN2wtc3oyb0ZzVXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNWpidGpqX2dvXzN5NF9jTXZEQjgwbmZiSXpNRVh4a0g0eGlBZlJ3aWNtQlFmb0JneFNSYWNMRjlnV1FlWjlqNTd3aDN2V0NrazJoTFNZVzBiU0JPcHFDTFBiT2JPQVY1X2lLVTZLNWpVa0FnWGY0WDktYUdLNGtnR21CUXlwVnhOVUJHTjV6MUk0TWxPeFU3bVRWdHRtQUllRDlXOVp5cUNDOHhkS1lwWFU0MXhxRnY1SkFZaFJDN09lZkJwNnhB |
Kirk/Spock is a parody. Worse, it's an ignorant parody. It's a drama major's idea of rationality.
A thinking person organizes their mental efforts around goals. These could be divided into intrinsic and derived. Intrinsic goals are foundational to the self. Humans have *many* foundational goals of varying strengths, put there by evolution - sex, companionship, children, food, beauty, nature, status, power, challenge, achievement... Post-humans will have all or most of them too, because humans wouldn't make ourselves into something we would find dull. So post-humans will apply clearer thinking processes to the *same* sorts of values. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ZzRJTGpYMEtUTmJfQnprR3QtSkFGbjZ2eGxxNzdBakZ0MXo0SnhCc0VpUlhnVE5rcDFYalNTTVROcFhyaHdwT1hTeWxFRWppNzJkcUxKVGdLYUlYRlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeFE3QkV2bFk3RjJpZk4yMmxrQ0cwdXpKNE5GR3ptNlJiVjdJZGFWaUstTGl0NGFQM1RGN2V1MXJhczBJM3lqTTlkOVhqSUZmY3I1TEdOWXhOck5GVzFOMWg0WFFaV2VRVTFFTVE4a3QwQ0NyVTVKdjItbjh6Z1paRm9SYmtJQ1VpVmJuNlNpV3FaNGExX3JkNW0xMS1yMkhzVmtDRG9BNnpCQVk3WUg0R25nQllIcnl5enl0SWQxTEtyOHIwMjVE |
> The true wisdom of life consists in reconciling the mutual contradictions between fields of human endeavor, and becoming, in yourself, that which is greater than the product of any way of thinking.
What are you describing here? Are you referring to experience or thought? If I ever experience that 1 + 2 = 4, then I hope my thoughts of what I know to be the real truth save me from insanity. No experiment can change a mathematical theorem, though physical laws are often revised due to new experiences. A mathematician can therefore sanely doubt the results of an empiricist, but the empiricist is a fool to doubt the theorems of a mathematician. Math IS higher than other fields because its theorems are truths which cannot be revised. I'm writing this because I am not a mathematician. A mathematician would ignore your comment, more likely never read it, being rather cognitively engrossed in the contradictions our finite understanding imposes on the infinite. Mathematicians are gods and your comment is blasphemy. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ZU9lWVdnaGtjS3A1ZGxSWW9FYzh2LTRtaXh1N2xmU0JKb3lkdnVPVmpJa2QtbzAzd05fTzk5eXAwc1ZNZ00wQ3BrOE1RNFB2Y2E5a3lUdHN0VUp0cHc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdacFBtRE9udXZKeXNQNURqeDZJblVOZFJENmF4cUtjT0tKUWp4bllwNlNCUzZXd253ZUN4VFpNQmtjM28xczhhX2xUQkZ6TmlKWWVCWjhxODBNdjFVRlFUVngwMks3SzlrOVVQU25zREUtUU1jd1BqcDNfUGZQS1lBZllmemVpeExYWnVCYnI4c0RTbkI5VmI0bXRzYXY5Wi13Nm1kRG4zeFYxT0ZIeTNQUDduYXBZdGJoMlpWVGFtX2l2a3NQaVpm |
Paul Erdos.
Anyway, you're arguing with the wrong guy. I wasn't agreeing with the OP exactly, I was just pointing out that you're being pretty insulting towards him/her given how little substance there was in your response. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2UUphdWgyeVMtZHd3c0M4NlkxcmlDcXF1WnBzOWVTV1oyMnc0QlNwS1dWczRiNFBlZFhWQWRKSkFiS2JrMlNNbE5mdzFxZ3JQX3V6cC1JNGxfTWVjOVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdadG9DN1ktbkpoNlExS1AtWHB3MEpQMWFxVUxTNEt3a09WZXg5QXpkOUV5WEdfMHoxNlNhdG1wd0NnZXdCRFl4cDBpTXB3dkFDN3JIbk5saTNrOXVPTWFiTGhfalhvT2JqSHJHOEpVdnA3MXM0NklBRFFhTFFJZjZXZGZnQTQzcFRVT1JoX24wTWtsZV9DbWpfUFNpZUE4UGI0dGdOS0x0ekRNRzRpTV9NTFBrMmh1Y2dfYXpaVHg3M3Q3RWZ0TzJ4 |
Though I disagree:
"Life is good for only two things, discovering mathematics and teaching mathematics."
Simeon Poisson | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2d0pUZ3hyb0JTM2lsYVFOMllFbnRMbjdvUkN5eVR1RmNDbW5RU3dwMUNQY1l0alBzQmF1cEdxaWZaSmhzWVUzaTA3dEFaSGdneWtOR3RYTERsSmpETGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaanpGSlpUdWlteDZaVUJZdDhodU1IYzcwOXNia3VCX2hObTJHZE5VeVNEcWFXZkQtSVh1QXdVZHZtSGJFY0pqUHFjWjBVaFBUQW42Q18xeHBVT09hTldXTWRpUUpTUmIzb2NMcC1XcU9PTjZhUVJ3SXZoNE9Vcm5SY2dScVdHSFJQcmsyYW8tWW9MeDRsSWpyQWZWN0VpdEdVYXBsRWlFdW4xMlE4eTNGaG1GNzU4TXFPY2JYSS1CV2UyRGtWdDF2 |
> and boolean ¬(α ∨ β) has the right truth table
But you didn't have any brackets! | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2YnlKY0V6OWVHS2NSVDBtczZiRW9tM0xpOWotVUpLaTVwVUdfbVkwQktDdm90NDlNd3UtWWtQRDlzWEUzT0szQ2t2OVloX01OZ1VsVU5OQVNtcDl1VGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaUW92WkZ3eXMzUWNFVThBeDg0OE1tTWh2dXloeEF1endyVmx2NmpHOVJXSHNJOGlNbzlhVmZTWVItbnhrQ2tpMVg4SGJ2czZLS1lkSk5teDdnbVJVaW1NRXBkbzE0TjU4TGI4OXZSQ0tYQWFBeWM2eWZvOG9Ocm0xMHVTeE9zeDV0Y2FGU09TR093N1VrV0JDZ05MdmIzRXBwSFpPRUY1OFE0WTFrX3ExUnNmaTB3VDJmM3o5UFdXSXBpeVU1SUdB |
> Shakespeare is filled with iambic pentameter.
I don't mean to offend, but one of my pet peeves is when people say this. It's a very basic structure which Shakespeare sometimes obeys. To say then that Shakespeare is mathematical on these grounds alone is not really a pertinent statement. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MDgzTkZYQmpXVWNSMTkwcVlJd3ZaOXd2V3B0dE1BLVVrUFU2TnRURndJSVF3NHBWeTYwVm0wTUkxN1VIajBUNEcxTWdkSW5OMmV1ZHZCV1FRX0ZOSGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNEVoanJ2ZXFsX3ZreGliUlNNTFljNFJrWS1aTTFOTmw5eUtfNW9BdUpmOFdRalRBbGREN0RyXzlDQW9iR3BUd1dlcnhpd21vSHNGZkxudnZsanpLYWNqdDlLNU1mb3pGdnFHaGw5SVJTaDUzR18tcWdNMGcydG91b3ZpOWVGTkVYaDU5UkRKejJTdFJOeUNCbW5yUU9GOXZYRnlzTGhlWEdHQlRGUTlHRDlSdmdCZHFkOW1XdDZiRHhYeXR6YzZO |
>Interesting, given how much that great piece of music relies on underlying mathematical relationships. Notes, quarter notes, transitioning from one frequency of sound to another.
I was intending to imply a more simplified division of the brain's functions: visual, auditory, rational... but you are right, it's much more complicated and art can appeal on many levels.
Indeed, certain types of classical music are literally thought to sound wrong when certain mathematical rules are violated. But Beethoven, on the other hand, toyed with and violated many of the rules. What he made is still called music because it still *sounds* like something. (the rule that music must make sound has only one exception, that being Cage's 4'33")
The analogy to mathematics here is that mathematics can involve many things. (heck, you can state theorems about waveforms that apply to music) But the criterion for something to be mathematics is exactly that steps follow logically from each other. The proof is in some sense the "performance" that validates the reality of the theorem.
> Much of what we find beautiful in nature (vs what we don't) has elegant mathematical concepts at its root - phi, fibonacci, symmetry, etc.
Funnily enough, I wrote a blog post about this very thing a little while back: http://blog.adudzik.com/?p=17
In summary, the golden ratio and the Fibonacci numbers are very interesting mathematics (I have done research on the prime divisors of the Fibonacci numbers) but virtually every "example" of their appearance in nature is a myth. People seem to like ratios somewhere in between 1:1 and 1:2, but there's no reason to think that they like 1 : 1.618 any better than 1 : 1.543. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VXZSNEt2TG1jLVlpbGtCZzJxRU9tY3hWc3VxZF91V2Q4Y3NKbldlU09xUllieEU3VVo4UlhwV25Cb3VsUU5LcXFYU2d2TE1qc0hSZ3lzUDhaeFloaEE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabDB5ajdELUJMeGkyYnFkZzFWeE1LemxKcWZlNThockxCU0ZEdkJBcVJ3emlrREFBLWhjazdBX25XT2wyUHpKSWZ3QUFZZGpDZFdTMFVKN0Z2bWs0Z1RtcjFrbDF1U0Y1U19IUlRodzFrMmhrdThRak85UThfNmlGNE85anUyQ0RxMTlQeGRQN3RnM3BBd2lnb3FEZEk4S2VHODNvWEJ1UnY0b1hzLWhvWWREanllQi10S0pCcDhOeXp2QThDLVFH |
I think the author of this article is confusing 'maths' and 'logical reasoning'.
The former is just a specific (And more formalised) application of the latter. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VUw1YXM4eVhDZ0daOFFaSkZIMWdCRWVENmgtNXBjNll1bTlJNUZLaEFVQU1xR1BRYmFrcF90SWYzcEZhT3hPZTBSY0xXRkt2Yms3eEJocmNLdUZNTEE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNHlNYmRFTFg3NURVd1dTRk5OcjZ1Vm5yN0JFZDNickYxNW0ySC1DZmltOWlXbHpiaHJJbmZ4a1Z5ejg1d1dBb2NSR2UzQlRPYzVXUEx2cWR0ZHJfQlhrN2FNYnN4alZKc3E0XzRzbTRGMU1PYjFiSnYyOUQ1N09aWVF2eGt3c0dEaFVXYzRPMXRGZl9vNFFVbldLbEpsSXJzejhMQTdCTnFYdjMzNHFJMlRzX1ZrQ3pWOTJXS3M1dGVQN0hqc01E |
mathematics is the only supernatural science | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RjBkczV1TDRZdUhCcnB4TjdIN0Fab0dZWXo5LXlsMEpKd0lZWjJHX3RYaEpkcFhCeUJJS1NZSzk3QUdIeGdmdTdpVlBNQTdfX2RXWldnaE4wZ1BPZHc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdadzVDTVEyY2VnN2NQaVo4XzBLRDBxZU9VdjBWbVlNMDZCZEJ1emRRdHhBUXRvTzk0OXdBUFZRQ1IxWnZSNnB4b0tMRFJZZE94VUFVSjYzWGhUS0xxY2ZOaVNMQWROZDFWQWQ1SUExOUZhT1JDRjdFWm53Q3lvcXlGaGEwVXpyVUxnWXRfbG5DLWdRdlVhUUdSNk5ZQWVoYTk3bnVzNlFHWUlDSVc0ajJNeS1KU0IyTG82anZJcDlzTDBkWnozMDA0 |
Sorry, my preceding post was put up late at night and I wasn't at my most coherent.
However, I really disagree with the thrust of your reply. You can't detach math from reality or from philosophy. To do so is to collapse into postmodernism. Nor does using math cheapen it - what would cheapen it is converting down to layman's explanations and then using those as if they were sufficient in themselves.
[Bayesian epistemology](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-bayesian/) describes the mathematical process of updating beliefs based upon evidence. There was for a long time an objection that while the posterior probability was calculated, the ultimate prior probability had to be guessed, made up or otherwise plucked from thin air.
[Kolmogorov complexity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity) allows for finite and infinite data to be ranked by relative complexity, according to the length in binary choices (bits) of the minimum generative description.
[Algorithmic probability](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithmic_probability) allows programs to be ranked by likelihood, based on Kolmogorov complexity.
[Solomonoff induction](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_inference) constructs prior probabilities from algorithmic complexity, filling in the gap in Bayesian epistemology and closing the loop from experience to learning.
When you look at all of the above, you can see that, although the "perfect method" is not computable, the *ideal* of a purely mathematical and provably optimal philosophy is well defined, and can be approximated.
Gödel's theorems cast down the idea that there would be a closed logical definition of all of math. They don't really relate to the above.
Note that I *know of* this stuff, but I don't really *know* it. I could be misinterpreting. Look to the cites for authority.
> I would not be surprised if there was one psychologist somewhere out there who talks about this, but the idea that psychology as a whole sees the brain in this way is simply not true. You are continuing to cherry-pick science that supports your philosophy.
When I discussed the brain I really slipped off the deep end into incoherence. I'll try and pick up the pieces.
There are 2 types of "mind" in the brain: conscious (AKA system two) and unconscious (AKA system one). The conscious mind follows rules, vetoes decisions operates volitionally, and is slow. The unconscious mind follows habits, makes decisions, operates automatically (and sometimes very intrusively) and is blindingly fast.
Intuition is a function of the unconscious mind.
The evidence for the behavior of the unconscious mind indicates that it operates though association, with any one idea raising the responsiveness of related ideas and engraving a small increment towards a permanent habit of mind. The speed of neurons versus the observed speed of thoughts indicates that any one mental message has to cross at most 100 serial neurons from in to out (note: serial. It can go through many many parallel neurons). This means that most mental operations have to be cached - they can't be freshly computed - and the structure of the brain is ideal as a trained cache of responses.
This is the nature of intuition. There is no spooky anything. It's computation of a sort very different from your regular silicon chip, but it's still computation.
> Of course, if, as you say, the brain is really just a computer, then we all already behave rationally and mathematically and there is nothing to complain about.
Come on, you can do better than that! That makes no darn sense and you know it.
> Mathematics is formal proof, and love and music have as little need for formal proof as a fish has for a bicycle.
Math is formal understanding, and music at least has very obvious connections, as well as some interesting and non-obvious connections to geometry that were on Reddit just recently.
When I'm talking about applying math to eg: friendship, then I'd be thinking thoughts like: "What, formally, *is* friendship? How can it be split up and categorized? Are there generative formulas? Can I construct from those formulas forms of friendship I've *not* experienced, and predict their properties? Is there a generalization of friendship and a family of friendship-like ways of experiencing? Is there a general algebra of interpersonal relationship? Can I calculate paths through relationship-space that will reliably shift eg: enmity into comity?" | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RFFSUWIwaVBSVW96VVh1b0NZRnZUS1lGdUVUNHpGMkp3S1lzc0h6Ui1GUHNRWUpuWG5oUVpUbDlNcjlKdVhmYkxKbTl2Q0d6bGtKMTR1Vm03WXdldkE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaOEZEeHB3YnI3bWR3eVdQUmpvMV9acEpFd1pTV2RaNWlubHNMWk4yTElwUG9saV9uRkdXTUhRM1pNRnFEZ3JqTHpnakY0c3VjbFpVU0dpeEg2RFYyTzgtOG53Qjh1SzM5VnJnYmJNVlZyUmQ2bFgwVV90ZVh4MlRoMkdrZWRIWVpJeWl3X0FUUkVfVDd1SG1lclJScnZZcDFMMDVRLWJrcEVCVC1Zd1dZNkpzWVNQaVZkaGF1RjNNUW1kQU5uLVZD |
First: every single link you posted has to do only with computer science. Though computer science has many, many connections to mathematics, you should not confuse the two.
> There are 2 types of "mind" in the brain: conscious (AKA system two) and unconscious (AKA system one). The conscious mind follows rules, vetoes decisions operates volitionally, and is slow. The unconscious mind follows habits, makes decisions, operates automatically (and sometimes very intrusively) and is blindingly fast.
If you can't produce a peer-reviewed article on psychology that backs up these claims, I'm going to accuse you of making them up.
>Come on, you can do better than that! That makes no darn sense and you know it.
Don't start making silly insults just because you don't want to take the time to understand what I'm writing.
> Math is formal understanding
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Mathematics does *not* have a monopoly on formal understanding. The only thing that makes mathematics what it is, is proof. Once you leave mathematics, and start doing computer science for example, you're free to use understanding tools that do not require proof, but you have stopped doing mathematics.
> Can I calculate paths through relationship-space that will reliably shift eg: enmity into comity?
There are two kinds of things we usually mean when we talk about spaces: vector spaces, and topological spaces. If you mean the former, you need to provide a) a field, and b) an addition. Probably you meant the second one, but then you need to provide a topology, which means defining an open set. Are you willing to do either?
Or are you trying to do a kind of non-rigorous mathematics? You accuse me of being a postmodernist, but trying to do mathematics by parroting terms and avoiding rigor brings to mind trying to write a silent piece of music.
Finally:
> Nor does using math cheapen it
Correct, only misusing math cheapens it. Please learn to tell the difference. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2dmdRV192aDVEX0x5cVpHNmZYbzI2YkY4dEljU2s3YVFZRmhrazZoZWxBWHAxWWRFS2tUMDRvNkxPNllxSXRNVmpVVFFGSktKWk11TXZwbkttZ3gyNEE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdadHlMNGxKMTU1ZDRBT3B0R2VWLVFRblA3VUdqY24tSEZmN29FQVVnUnVhc0xfVmZ0T0xiOVlPRHZQZW5GYi1xN0dHdVRRWThRWlV6VUVIMl9vaDFLSlhNWkZEMnZiT3lKemdqYU5oTFlMRmowaXBNbUdlOVpUS2ZaekJFX19kcm83MVJDM1A3dUNBNzRJVEY2UWhSUUtBeEZiSjZTR2JxSmlQbFIxem92V3BnZk9aSXdTSjhFU19CMnBkYUNjWTRn |
> every single link you posted has to do only with computer science. Though computer science has many, many connections to mathematics, you should not confuse the two.
I disagree with both of those sentences. None of those are exclusively Comp Sci, although all but probability are rooted in the math of computation. Also, Comp Sci isn't distinct from math. Comp Sci is a branch of math and is distinct from hacking or trial-and-error.
> If you can't produce a peer-reviewed article on psychology that backs up these claims, I'm going to accuse you of making them up.
My source for systems one and two is Daniel Kahneman (who should know) on Google video, [here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dddFfRaBPqg). For 100 serial steps, originally from Eliezer Yudkowsky (not sure where), attested various places online (example, [here](http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_2XbpFvR1IoC&pg=PA144&lpg=PA144&dq=neuron+~100+serial-steps&source=web&ots=TjUVXZunIc&sig=-CuMCbZ1xE9LfYOkg7vbeqkSl8o&hl=en)). I don't make stuff up and I don't believe I'm cherry-picking.
> Don't start making silly insults just because you don't want to take the time to understand what I'm writing.
What you wrote in that one sentence made no sense any way I could read it. Computers in operation are an exemplar of reason and mathematical rigor? No, they crash and have bugs all the time. Computers run programs that implement reason and math? Mostly not. The underlying Turing equivalence of the brain makes it obey the reasoned and mathematical nature of computation? True, trivial, and off-topic. There is no kindly construction of that sentence that makes useful sense and the most neutral construction is petulant.
> Mathematics does not have a monopoly on formal understanding. The only thing that makes mathematics what it is, is proof.
Many online sources disagree. Wikipedia doesn't even mention proof until some way in. Proof turns mathematical speculation into mathematical rigor and it establishes a working system that can be relied upon in use. That use itself isn't non-math. Even speculation isn't non-math. Fermat's last theorem didn't suddenly become math when it was proved. Your definition is sufficient (things with mathematical proof are mathematical) but not necessary (so are some things without proof as yet).
> are you trying to do a kind of non-rigorous mathematics?
I was trying to think about ways of thinking, off the top of my head and in the full knowledge that my understanding consists of incomplete and dumbed-down concepts. I'm not avoiding rigor, I'm in process of learning rigor. If I were to revisit those speculations afterward, I'd be able either to firm them up or dismiss them from better knowledge. I don't regard them as "finished and signed off", I don't regard them as useless. They are intuitions that might later be developed. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-12 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2azV4OTdhNmhTekhlbnB1Nk51ZDlZTjhRbENfT0VUUW9rLVlSeWZBU2p2MEFEREthTHBuRXVqb3pLZzQza21nUzJLY2o3SmxvWDdrN3F0b1hNSm0xbEE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaRkVrdWRqTHI5b2FrVWQ2amFXM2tuYlFjMXNpRExFMDdzZ2ZfWERfUU5Jd2dXQ0ZiVDYtc2drWVFyVUVSRjNETno3ZmNEVmFYRVV2OHNxa1ZwSWJFSGRUZ2ZVeTR6LS14OFQydE85eHhtdmkwZUxJaGVhVU5FeEhLa1phTzBmOFlXWjRSODN3SHhidUdoV01UbFhJUjl1OEwzNGMzczZTLVlJd1p3Q3R3V2xvS2RqbmF2RmZmSnlLV1M1SW95Zy1O |
All I'm really saying is that I find it amazing that you are so focused on philosophy, psychology, and computer science, (which you claim is a branch of math, even if that's so it is just one branch of dozens) but can refer to rigor in only vague ways as something you are "learning."
If there is a central point on which we disagree, then, it is of the importance of rigor in mathematics. In my view, without rigor there simply is no mathematics. The sense of beauty in apprehending the logical structure of the universe--that drives many like yourself to near-religious fervor--is stamped out by the use of muddy reasoning, questionable statements, and uncertainty.
You are free to hold a contrary opinion, of course, but I would highly recommend reading more actual mathematics before you develop such heated opinions on how it has everything to do with everything. I suggest picking a subject far from your current interests, complex analysis for example.
Footnote on Fermat's Last Theorem: A little rhetorical question. If it had turned out to be false, would you still call it mathematics? Do you consider the statement that 1+2=4 to be mathematics? (if so, perhaps our world views differ even more extraordinarily than I had thought) | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-13 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2aUx1SVluZExDcjFoTWU0cTZENmNoUWpuMEdTeDJVM19XVlJBeGpSOHFIWnRYRjAtTGxseUMwZ3VtQnAzQ095d3hEU0VjTy1wSlhkZUtOMndlRGIwQkE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaazZmN1NtQ0tfRzUzRXRjS3RtbnF5YWhWUU9aRXZrWXl2X0xhRnd5X0d3NFh5enhweG4xQldUVEFrUU1qbmVPS0RsT3d1QkY4LW5sSkl5WVYxalBweHZxMHRleDZTNENGTFZzRVpOSGV1Mzd1QXY0SDF3WTN1d1lLWHRRb00xaTBsa3dIUHBycExubWtvTnZNT0dLX0EwTjk1TDRBWDNISDVHbm90cWZWa1ZnQTVzNHF1a2UxVGFCTFlPZTJYQWRj |
It'd be absolutely enlightening if the people that disagree with me would explain why. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-05-17 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2cDFJdlhyc2p5TW53VEppZTFBdFEzcy1oRU5NaERET1FGRV9fdElra1BSU19oMkVEbmlqUTRKZWlmaFFvOHU2MkNFX2F1anU2akJCZTFrYnJuWlB0V2c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdacmtzMjJRaWY1endySml4QTNjMXpreHE2WUgwVTZyUExEQmxrOElQMmhJeTZNMC1wbVZGczhTVFRmS3VJMENaMXhycGJlNmVGZWRJZmJ4YjhuZ3dONHJrRXN0SzYyTFhNaVVXMDNUYjdEMmJ3MjBkR1VLeVdYNjJnNXJvSVUyVkxsMWo4N185a21ieXRUZlo3X21Pa3Q2Y0lnTHJ4ZnZfNzdCU1gyaFpORlUycFU0c0JabUF6Mkx2eFpsalBQdUh3 |
The solution is to have admins manually subscribe a subreddit to other subreddits like users do. So programming should subscribe to haskell, perl, python, scheme, functional, and types (and others). Functional should subscribe haskell and scheme. etc.
Then, if some chucklehead makes a videos.reddit when video.reddit exists, then video.reddit can be updated to aggregate the newcomer.
This preserves the community aspect, where tags generally don't, imo. There's no reason why tags AND aggregated subreddits can't be implemented, though.
| r/programming | comment | r/programming | 2008-05-27 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2Sk92OEllRTBGcGd4YWctRmgwWndSOGhDZEZMUnA3elVvZWdrSWcxVWdXMTVFTm9hTm0ydko5M3hqVDN5Nzl4TmpMSzFZamljNTlZMmVkUHc3aHVIdXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaYXlvOWNCTTA3M0FQSHhCWEFHTzJFSUtRY2ZjSFpkS2ZCTTl3blNJZU53bFpqNHZHZWN6OFpxT0ZmLVNxZGdsbThwZ2t3cmlIaTFGWjFOTVRJYzRTUDFyWlBUT2FvOXZUREE2ZG5pV0dZdGRseUwxbEhqbEJqWXNqeVZvOVpURHRYUXBGTHA5MUdlWi1ra0RsRktsVTAzMFlibG5raFpHajc3V1JjU3pCM2hhREFybFpoMkZKanYzNVhhMXkzUHI0eW9wSDJYMy1Jei00RmVjdWRzNTlZZz09 |
There's a .899812234123472983471 chance that Spock is not a good representation of a rational person. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-03 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RDRLR0FiLWhGUEdCUzJKLTFwWnk1TTFDNHprUWxJLWZsWlptbTVDWEliS3Qwb1RVMEpkLS02S1lQLVdKUmRLcXdGanJscEc3M3ByRU5WZ0dEVk5uTVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdadlJGdDZXSEVDSmE2Yk9mZnJkazlMUUl3YWtDZFhMdjlnVF9ONlBoLV83SC0tZDM0RWtzQXFIaktTTFNHaUJnZjlocGg5S3dMWlFud0FObFBwVk5kS3VwcDBtYTJOeEg0UnE5bnp5WGhncGtLV2FZWWZKNHhON1l6ZVJ6dll3emY4bmRxeEJfQ09SRTQ0eVZwSnhyT3o5VHJTSHhRLUpKOUV2Vk5DUmJfQmdldXJjNUtWdlRpTXpnc1QtSEpqc1gz |
It doesn't really matter that some statements can't be proven true. It's not like mathematics is going to fall apart because you can't prove the Continuum Hypothesis in ZFC. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-03 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2eHUyWUh5dGw5aGNFaVVONGZpVllqaDlrSjZhSUFOeXVDZ3BKOVlBYzBEN2IxMGRmMXZBcFZaRGg4ZnI2dHc4bEZMUmFRWERrVmU3Vno0YmplTU9sQ2c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaY19temw3ZXpTd3g3TEUyTVg0aGY2elJSc3Y4bTdQaFBhcVdUMjhKd0NFQ0tQMWFiUGV1eWFRZThGSVJTNnhxNDRab1huRTA0Ym9zTEpCdmlUS1YzQTFjaEd3aEFFZl82THZtMTBnRTRYQXdJSm5leWxLTExJV09PZWpELS1aTnlTc3JOY0o5R3k2bi1qdkdGZmpKZ0xPUlZELUZINFdsMXpGT05VZnJDMzJ0WlZSRWw5RUNRR1NjNGd2aTdOQWNG |
He never said that math included every aspect of life, just every aspect that makes you better than a monkey. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-03 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VDBZQWJ2SkJJczl3ejNVbWQ0Y0x3Yng4aE85VndlUWd3T01FTzNURE5HNFVFMEdMTkxMaDFGcmJldmctNUhkT2pKZ0k5Sm5Mb2RacFVteFZEcGlNT2c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaRWhHN0g4SVUtLW5MZTVmNG1hN2pPLUtKQmVKNXBvTExUY2p2MXZReW9tOWpIZVdRS0t2R0Z4Y0RuWXpQZ1lSbllmdm1UN1ZuUkl3UTRyc3BqdWFTY0hGeG5OdklfRjV0Si1kelB3dG8tc19pZF9YakZtRnpUUVVDWmttTm9fbEQtcDdsQmdCeThaNW9jTlF0dm9oci1sOGtEaDNkelJXc0xfcjMzRk1SWjJIY25YcnA5aG9fS2RmWmdGUmNfZmVz |
"Old as the street", as we use to say in Sweden. :-p
But seriously, it's old, and it's not even an accurate representation, at least not when using this as a visual guide for the ten dimensions spoken of in [string theory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory), which is what I guess this is supposed to be helping about. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-21 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2ODJPNWtYdTE4SVA0bmxzb3pDazNsaktkS2xaRjFSTUNvTWNyZUdNb0ctR0dSX0pROEJUVDQzc09SLTMtaTh4ckFnaWhvdmxGcVlORERMNUR4cEVLT0E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaRXAxQXdQeGdnS1lxendxMTMyR1FfMWpxT2lNRHdZNm1oSm0tLTBQaDNhRGxtSnh5bTA2QXdJazg1bmpGWXpSWDRNZk55NDRZMUNLUlB2UmF3QnA3NEFEOEg3RVE4Q3JtVThBQkVRamlwQTdyaTRyRmljMndnUUQ4Y3pSeHVfQTFlakkzcFpoZHNrSmx1U3pZSWFiTWJ5YV9HNkg0N0x6UFZjNmRZLXVPZzVqTU1vWHRoazJIQXFxalNYOXhQeGk3 |
Worse than not accurate: it's a complete fantasy. Pops up on reddit [from time to time](http://www.reddit.com/search?q=%22tenth+dimension%22&x=0&y=0), though. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-21 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2cjVYUC1sVmFFdWpmZmFyRTFhckFqendSaF81el9md0phQk8wdkRMVGxtX1c0YmJFdm1ua1FROEdCUzBXNFlNR0ZydWdPbXlMc3ZDenBHX21aMjVGTVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabzJ5ckVTLXhwQWYxYTcwdEMwQzl6ODh6ZzBzUHE3cGpYNWF3MUhzcUhPUlJvTEprZ09HX1l1cUZHWUZqd280STBjeHZLcnhtV0dzRmE4ck1jeS1iRTltdE5DNGtRaFNKZGVFR0d0Ny1fa0lmWmYtdzdzZ0xxY1pJSzd2aXh0V1FnbVpkd2xobW1nMVZUSlk5QUEtdzQyYjF1eENXcXdFVlJ0R1F2aFVkV19HMlh0d0NzNFFfMXZ1N0ZSWEZ4YVRQ |
Can you offer a more accurate representation? I like exploring these concepts, even if the model is incorrect it offers a space to think about abstract ideas. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-21 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2WXRrRGJPVUNjTXg0di1fbGNnN3BVVS1rejMtTElycHAzWFc1WENrSkd2THpFVy1kdE4wRENORzQ5dG9URzk3bFk5eHBOZ1ZHbUh0bzdiTmIxeHc0YWc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabVNSV2lzZVNZUWhsNFpBTkhuaUxQV1NaWE1mVVdqWFQtenhubzBaOUcwT3NGODRwa0hVcjlySTZ5R3k4N1d6dDNtM0xUdDBNU2Z2OHVrYmFTcGdvYzNrSWpWNjBucUlVMWtGS2IyeUtUUmZxTEZDbnFrREEwV2daTC1zWjZuNWxDUHdkNm9yUjJLa0hza1MtbHgwN3VNbkZBYnA4QTBiQ0ZWUWdxMThGblRwZndoR3VPUExDS3dkYmI4WFlFUmhh |
What bullshit. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-21 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2YzdSTUFFUl83eDFfcmxGMlIxbUlFZFl3UG4xYXpwYmhDUXB2YllybV8zRmxWeTRSNmYwTFF5VDFkRTZqU0lUSjFxVVdSWGQxUmJ1cDNWY2NhQkVFX3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaWXZoS0gwSXFIMW1iRjJPSFZFdFNvTVJGVGdKdlkwMnFtOVN4akdJQlZrb3d5d1VNSkVGang1Q2Rlb1h1V1BOSGUtajBpLTVFVmN0c3V4MGdFU0NKamd4WEduOEZNeVZ5ZWN2dFE2YWRwVDliUGpXeHZYU1RvWHhLQ0hyQlVoajU3YmlybEJzaEhwSUhNTmZsVFQ1SHBQNWR1TVNHZVdBOElPYXNLaDhyYTVFS09vQ3BVQUJsbDd3ZzNiLW45VERw |
You're probably not best served by trying to imagine it -- in the sense of building a mental *image*. We're very hardwired to 3D. Having said that, [this](http://www.reddit.com/info/6ocro/comments/) looks like it might be OK once it's back up. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-06-22 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2Z05aeFphSHIzbjFTNWE2RTBxNHpNMXdsSHZINExjTEZrVU5MRS1pNTdrWlNiVXNOb2JMODhHb3F3VDhqQkNSUkZoUU5GcGI4V2swdnpmc0RESS1UM1E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdadkxHVUZpTmJYbkxRMHdlQS1OV3RfS2ZUQ1M0bUVwbGx3b0did0tlTlczYzZhd3l5VDRkby1JQWpMX0RXSVBjWnF0TVZ4N3pjRG4yYy1KcWRLN2Z3dTJGM3poaE5zSmRaUXRiSnhBUWJZQzlCTi03UnpKS0lzRW1LdjlTWS16Tm5hRjlkSWo4NUJRRURBd1JaV042XzRjWUJqaE9kWHhCblVhTHdKd1o5RExobkdWdGhPbjdxSkhDRWVUYjBMYklZ |
is this really funny? | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-07-01 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MjYtR2djaWI3Nmd0cGxFRVVtZmRYY0Y3NFhzQlVzQ3lBUDZzeVlkMUY1ZDdGR3RVNlIzbzRiaXFNSnlNUGNxWGc2SkdXdmE3aUNVd2JUR3RNSHZiUGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaZ1h2SHZCZ19XRElPcFpOa2dCazJhVmxxTG1hQTk4RjNpc1BKbnhPU3dMSlVhOU5aZnpzRm14ZEl4ZjI2NzVub0drZEVqcVVOdlVxLXloWmFkRmFDb3R4eXdCQS1NT05NSTJEMWRPRUxlS1ktLU0zd1U3RjFZS1VaSWNXcEc5SjNUT1NDY2hpZVFkYjlBSWdqNXdSRnRia2FjNEpsRmJPLUszWDdzbXBHNGFFaGdzN2RycWhLaDJMcDdwVDliaGVo |
no. | r/math | comment | r/math | 2008-07-01 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2Z1o5Y0lBWFJIWHoxQ1JNb2FDd0ZiVE9sekk2eGNtNmx6Wkp0WUtXQV9KaThZeTQxY3QyQnNmcTFRbEJqUG9Qck5WZlRfOUN4R05jVk5VdzRpUWJLcVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaQXMzRWxOY05Fdl80cTQ2WEk1VE1haHc0YXhQQmtHNm1Ubm9DYlo1eGZSVl9JQmZPZ0ZxbG9NUl9FVXNCTGlwZVRaektnMUM3YXA3RWxwY0tZcXFwc05mRXoyazZybUhlS0ViZnRYUUxtdkFZSEwzUVRTQU42Z1cyMFoxYWVCNXYzbkRCLWNwLUNlb2F1S3BfSU44S2ZveVBmRHBVZzVUOUV4bmtfQ1RVTEdpdzlETUdvenJjLUNLaWV5R2VHamJq |
Gore also rolls around in a motorcade with 3 Escolades. that isn't good for anything | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RlYwYXdnaEZ2RWUwTS02a1pxUXJMLUpOcGtJT2NCS2hudGFoUEdnTlF3akJXaHdzS1U0bGZXM3Q2SjMxdHV2NjFmT0VUVHhJcjFaajFFQ05xdi1YWVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaU0Z5a3k3T2tZTWp2VDR1S2NUWmZWQXhnSkxFUm81bVpTMnhNZ2xERnU3a3l3NTc0X1o2QVA3S2cxdGhYRnFZODJFOTZubnIzXzJ2Rmd1WVh6dThTYUR6eTU0ZVZxVGlTMWoxMlVVVlNnQmpxRE5jdWxBLVJWQnMzNGZUbm1OYVFYdEQ4WDdGY2pLbzlzRjRNQTQwR2RhQk1LS1J6VWNWU25KVUtuWW1ZckUtdDRZQldKcVJlZ29UNDdVMVZpNzdZcDd1V09iLXE5RDhXWUw4WHNYR2FvQT09 |
Ha! Gore is definitely at the top of the list | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2SGdHZUhYT2ZoODFlNzF6UklTOHN4SmRIYjBCcTZZb0t6c3BwVjFmOXp5c0pZTTlReE4xaU1VdFF2WU5qSXpTS2s0Mk10Wl9Da1NPOTBoajFseVRJd2c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaaEQ0WE1nelJicXQ3YlpHTjctTU04ZVo3UjJqbzdpc0FjRjNoOU10bXhPMFhLY3BvWUY4TnlGMHhvWnBVOFVpdWlvNWYxTHkyXy1FbE5jUjhMQXp2czJwcTl5aGdCNW15M0gxZFNoOVQ0RmoxalFNVWZUS0JWd0NXSi03ZUtOUVp6NFY5V1Q1N3llTkNUV2VnOEl6RVdVWnhpZVJqNFp3ZjQ1S2JJdWhXOGVJQURUNXFicExCV0s4NUFiWnprWDV6Z0Q1S19TNDZZT1NmV1VKakkyS1lRUT09 |
I'd pay admission to see Al Gore breathe fire at the carnival too. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MUNydU15MjBDYk5UZ3RmN252TXV3TnRMdS1RTlBoSVpGcGlZNllPUWhYYnBDTW1jOEhDS0J6N3lTczYwbHZQeFdJVXdYaWs3dHl0aWQzMmE5a25tbVE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNmZzTkFsSU5wZ254YXNTMkxtZkRoUGdISG1kdUNfNHVGOXdfLVN0OUoydXZFZXFaMXJMOVgzSWw1dnkwM3VGZmVwenhKYlVRcWlQb3BJSmVNZTVLcFVjelBaMFoxYTRuMFdoWmpuZVRORHI5dUZKTmpjWlh5TVJFcWJaVG1kR3pEemNQeVVDbzRqeGhsek8weFJYdXAwWk10azVGY1Q3MEw2VHVZZUdreV9KOVlqaWhvVTFZMXFYYTM1ODQtX2ZIUk9DYlhGYUlPZjYzRHpjaTF0d05GZz09 |
Is Sting a hopeless eco-hypocrite? | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MENuejlDRkNDLVdfczRHNklsRU53SDdkMkdLNW5xenN4OUE0QkNHTmp3UmNCNW9ENUQ5QjZhS2FrWGxZUGtyakVId1NONXZuVGY1bWxORkw3MzJpX1E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabmZzNVU0Vzd6MzNJOFpRZzRnMFh2d3dYNlBsNjNudmJ0Q0M4U3BQSTdYQlRoZWxHMDM2WXRlRUVaNXJvYUx5MHRQUlEyclpCQ2dPVTdLZnFpOEFNcHpxQjJtNXJqZUw5ZjEydzNKeERJWUNYTVdadF9EYjc0dlVaMnVwVmNFQUczTWdWLXJqV05mTlJyS1l5eHR3SEJvRVFJZVJLTlZJaHlNSmU2TzF2Y2xfV1R3UHExcmtVbGdaYTZ2R3c3QUM1OXZsSldzVDUxTjc2NjBCSGoxV3JYZz09 |
Hypocrisy is the foundation of our society, don't be too quick to deride it. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2M0pjVlNoUmt0TF9KcnJuQjZiNFRXTVBpSkNLVUlrZ3RXZmxKRk56TmZQSzJqOTJWa2xNQ1JfNF9oejFLYk9xUHRBNWZnNmp2SUQ4X0VuUjdTSTlhLXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaWEhTb3BpSU1xYVlaRTRNbENsLTJEel80U0ptWmZWSmJYVXE2RzBtT3pPbUJaODE3bUU2dXhLZzNBOGdCQnM3b1p1MHZhU3NaOVZXS2ZGZmZZb1Jrbnd4c0FWZjB1OXFZdkpvdUpvVmhoQWZnVDV1SGl2S29PWk94Z3JGSjFnaDVSMWpzYi03QTN4ZDlPU3VsM2ZBbnpsdDJsN1VwOVlWZHNXd1c4T25MaHFEQ0ZELVBHQ25iZy1EQXZyVkZHcVZlcWREZ2NUSTNLT1BoQVhodnFmWElyUT09 |
Some of these guys pay for their pollution with "carbon offsets". A bit of shell game, sure, but at least it's something! | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2UmdBV054Q0thWFJXSmNPaEpnYklIUVdxanJqbVB4aHBoNnVkTUJoSk5WMTNseGZ4TEpxd1B2d0dlUnpBRXJkNUZFb3F5MWtfZXp1alhBc0V6MlI4aUE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaclhRZi1aUFhocG5sU2NjbWgwZmpGUkhUXzVYelJ0YzVFeTM0Z3ZFaG80RjRYQ2J2Z0NxdUFMNFA5UDNLQ2J4M3lSa242OEdjMDVSVGZOU2RyR3ludVduLVhMaE93MGFWbUg1V0lmS3ljVFJXYXh4R0dKcVExRlJLMFc3ekF3MFJWV3pZM1g3dmdPWjFrVEE1Tk1HdU1HX1p0b1JWR1hxeTNuU3BsdXF2NjhRck1iZU9WUFc1N1pMSmdnMlN0bUdqWUg2cjJmbDd1ejVJSHRtazE4SXp4QT09 |
I hate f*ckers who don't practice what they preach. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2QU12b0lSUXRFWC1pcGl4UnVCc1RpaXhZa1pSWFJXOWFOald4RnBGY2dJQThwVDJLR280NkVRWE0tVTA0TmFDWmdRWDc4aW5GR3ZpNVVJQ1IteWxJSlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaWjljcHYySkxLTTlMVnN6MTRaU2FNVXV4UVhsVzl6OHRKOEhTelVOakJGOFZ2Wk5OY21Pcjl6RHJnUzBnY3dha3k1cWpiSzlEcktTQW9SZWNwaFkwTG9JRldIclZJMHRKeXI4YzR3aXBkLVJ0STE3ekxCY0N3OWNqNGNpZjdrcVluazlEU3c5RHgyenBSalVSaU10WnV2eS1CanViZ0ZwVk1tbmh2X1lkc0ZUSERPVWpaaUlkNTh0dFRCNmx6WDJkV3V1RkFYWExNZUFXN2VlNG9peksydz09 |
[Jesus' followers do not leave any foot prints. Even if the Earth dies, God will supply us with another. Do no fret.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08mjAeUR4Gs) | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2azhHU1p3ejc5clNHdk1TMmszRFdQM05WRGhnSzVaWmp1Qm5aRVJJWWhlelJBS05GZjFib2dRLWU3ckltRE5zTHg4bG8xb0NFR0N4bTNfRFRxVnBDVUtnSl80bjlkbFBTektUNEF4bGg3YXM9 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdacXR2a3A1R01FSG1faVhVa01naGVZbUxTcUllZ0dESUJxY0IwRlB4UFNwbzVFNjhhek5mQVZFNmVvOC1RVTFHelR2MWdQdkZ3THE0UDdxaUJNNXdJWG5Yb0hmb2lmdzNlSjI4cEp3VkdhTWNEdDBKZWstSUlHaE5rS01sU29oMDRFRl9hU1JGSkpMMm1pSUwwcHdFeXBpSVZtWXhNU3dqMURXOUhlaFZoS2pEMHlKN2ZSVkkzNDJ0UnpfaERvMGNfTzdOVXVyVTBQdXZFTTBhclRSdWxOdz09 |
I hear Al Gore eats babies!
With that I can now do nothing about global warming. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VDNZcDFuaWN3TmRGRlNXcm5ndGRjbXpFOXg3QWVBYWczTzBYcmxnb0NhMHhRaC0zZzEwRXZfUGUyNF9jVVV4WHdfNE1xSHlmRWJYUXYtV1JUM3Jzc3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabWVzbXptalM0R1FrekJ5QVFGYmFpQkZIdzNjamdpZ1FiY0t3c2ZaSGxMeFhacHJNUS1WZFpiVmhRMExWaFFhbjdYNlhSampuTEhYdXlPeDhGd2RQWGZvSFRFdXN4M1kzZk9IbGozNDZ6WFEycThlaFo4TkZMNlRlNWtiTU01cnFRNmZxY1RCSnJWS2tIR2tCcjVkeXJDcklEY2k3Rmt1OWFaNnV5T0QzUEFPdjNqX09hUkI4ZUpVanJldUkxWTVuVkRyMkVTVE1XSDE4czNiN3RCdV9Ldz09 |
Why is "practice what you preach" so essential? I am sure their preaching environmentalism has a positive effect on humanity as a whole. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2T2FKUjRyMTQzOFdBQW9rbDRReGliTjBOM05renluSTdxSU9QUm1nYlRMZHVWc1pUOWpvNHo0YXdxRi1ob1ZGVmhHel9CSWF0cjZVS0RNdHJ5YV9FWFE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaX0hod04zUUdDYzgxbU1rVElCYnE0S3F5OU1paGNPVi13Y1czY1JDV2Z1N1hmRi04dEVFbVQ5S2RZU0hGWm4wdHBjTzZ5SmhWY2VHc1A4MzZvNV9RVXdaVWxVbTdYdTlGa1BrUUdxekxRTnU1VEwya0x5UEFnV0ZKM3g5ZW1OTlJ5M2dqQjVrbmpVaXpMU3JKWTNXRnpMa2NjZWd0R3MwWGczU2xmTTFwallrVzlqa3M3ZHR5VXlZNXZjdVZMMmVtRTY1VGFTRzFVbFVYZnBlWG5meVB6QT09 |
Haha. Gotta love those carbon credits.
Ain't it funny how we've designed a system where only those who aren't rich enough are disallowed from using energy? | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2LXpJYnRfcV9Ga19WVURsX2ExNlBULVNsSVl4OUJad2hQVUVFWWlOcU42YWhmb0hjd1ZIWEVVdWdtN3E3X0xlakZfZXlaZERCOEdYQTN1TzJqNnRqRlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaVGxYc2hzRU43Y0c3TVg5VzAxaXV6TFRTaTd2NkZVUTc1UURIRkZ1UWl1UmttbktfaFhDVGg3RzlXWmlSOGlXRTlTRnZqWEY4WjQ0OVY3UHUtclozOFU1Z1FCcXBzYmkzS0kwdXlOdzNxWjBuT1NoUVE5ckd4ZXZfcWRET28wZTF1TjdOVXpzWFpvUnI3RTFKQzFIalVXNmI1cGZ5aHpIclpZTDJwUXViRkV0OUJPTXlvTTJKajhBYjRpekFtaXJtZzMyS0tHVGNHMDJmaGhmUU5uZDVYZz09 |
Carbon offsets are total b.s. It's pretty much buying the public off, for not practicing what you preach, for those who epitomize hypocrisy. If you honestly, and truly, believe in something, you do not go against it, period.
The biggest hypocrite is obviously Gore, and he should be going out of his way to set an example. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2YlQyakJNWkJMSXlfWG9zSXFmbTF0OWJoU1dVZ3BsbldzanpVdjJhbFdCd3UzMTRJN08zU3ZMUl9mQWlxXzlnemNqWkFfdWp6RW9rZGtSYkJIanlqb1E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaTWctVzFwb3Q0dTBPS2JiZmZTR2FvU3U0cnlKOTFIdUpWWGpMY3ZMOWtwTFNvX1E4MTJoSDhrUjQybUlGSGlzd1FRWUIxS3dTOHd3YUdpUllIX0JkVE9HS1FfYy1xQzUwaFdmN3hpYmlJemt1eVdCcU1sX0pQV25yWEdzUEhFcEtUUWZxZHhkdFVKZk54QTVXbHVlUzUtSXVsaXEyYzJvUHdGaWV1eHR0dDR1RDBWOWlDdDZMZ3k5NmFoMDAtazJpdWYyckVQbEVtTHpwa0lfSDJLeGZyUT09 |
To those who believe, no explanation is necessary. TO those who do not...nothing will suffice.
| r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VWRWTmJJdzBxMnRMSDhXaUxNX1JfWk5HUkE3UVZYWWU4VnBkWWI2R1pwLVM1OWZoNWlLb2MtMzAwLUd0M1VabUkzMWozVzlmVHRyc2I1Rk5zTm40Tld3QS10enVvOWlnUzlYbzhyenhvOUU9 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdac2p5ZzdOWDFWWFA0YmRuUDhSeVdJS3lzWUc4S0l0Tzd5MzdhT3JJeVFwdnJ0bUt3eUQ2Q2o1TDdIOHNPVUNzelc4RTNOcGdvZlFGblYyeUFVOVdjeG1IWGhwYWJtOV9XNFRRWjNfbjZwcFJra044S19kVmN4YktQRHE1SWREdTVxUHZlWEtWSHdRZzFubDkwdjhaT1FkZEVKRW8yWjhCZDNMN1EtVFZJMzBMTlp0cVRwZ0dOaC1JeVNLd0N0SzJ6NlNpV3JmaHNYYmpVNmp6ZXRGY19yUT09 |
I only read the Al Gore one and stopped there. Gore's entire home is powered by green energy. What ever tool wrote this just sort of omitted that fact, which makes me question the entire piece. But, then again, actually taking time to write an article about celebrities and how much energy they consume is one of the most pathetic endeavors I've ever heard of. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2TnFwNDRDUmxPRUxWU01jbjN1QmtvaldSSW5kYXhaR1J4QVlaWllPRlNRbGltVnVJemtCRnp1TkV3Y29XY1BqcXRFNTlxajc2c0pJTjlacU1wZTNqV3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeDdlc09GeEtqZ1R5X1g4VnN2RXltU0xmbnJmTmJTVlBPa1E1bVhrY3hEek85eG9MZno0cG5tbDZJZXZ2UnVQNU1vOU9UUzNyTkF0M3ZTVG42U2F6Y2gzaDdlNlRpdFlTcFpLOEZKOXBLb0RPTVFZYjNaY2FuZG5IMFJrVVB0QUxRazFkeXBzQ1dlbF9jY29yTk93a3B0MGkxWXBxRVRyUjFGc0dJOV9uQzY2MHF1ODdwRHNqSEszYUt1NlNCNEhDd2NEcWpPT0xFTnNHMnlYOVRXVXEtZz09 |
Fuck you. Co2 for a tour is a fine fucking trade off. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2YzFFdUhkYnRGRnp2ZmxYZWtMbXk4alNBU0gteFVmMUJWMGxlY3I0NXU0M0hCV3l6dG9LeUw3OFROQzBSTDl6N3VLYUxLcVpnNzdaUzFqSUdxM1gxWWc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNGc3eTZmeVJIcTNIeGdILTF1aDlqcHVoanUxWlhNMHR0QTRwUzZlUlJ0MS16cXNXb1hNOFc5Y290WjBkcmpxLWZqUVp4YV9yTWtrNlNic0x5Q0stUzVrYVBfYm5SakdVN3FxRktqd0hyM1BEQUZFYjBZd3AwYjBNaDNwVWRHSDhXU25VbFZiVGsyUVRMRDQ3TlZOekFKcmhLcVctbmpYVGJkeU91QVBDaVJucEEteDVnbHpCQWZaR3FSWTlsMHUtUlk3MS1fZlZ3YjQycjNreG51TGNZZz09 |
Are you serious? So people should just lead by, "do what I say, not what I do"? That is, and has always been, and horrible way to lead. People have deep respect for those who practice what they preach. If you preach to people about conservation, yet you're a glutton, why would anyone listen to you? They won't. To be a leader, to be respected, and to have people listen/follow, you have to lead by example. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2NUU1bHBmM010S2tZbGVMS000RVUzRk5RUEVqYmsxNVJpWnBZZU5EbzZzX3pZRFFnaDQtbVBHYXZfeklIbm5IMkFPakpVWS1CNDFLRkcxc0tuV3lNTkE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdabzB5N2NvckFZWWpRSjFMTUVHTzlLSWJ3SndjU3cxdWVMWE9HVFZuYmE3cDB6cjFuSFpCaU5NWmdWM1hfSlQ0SWNDTTU3NXBmd2pITGNtNjNmU0laM3FzaFcxUzNoZEdRMzFwbmVOejB5YVBBWHBUM3Y5Vnl4eXk1eUtuSmx3M1dlTUY0MnNCUVlhaXZRT1FyUzNtTnZESm1sam9wRjlzbnphV01qdHFuWVozRGZkSUR4WUJNbmREZmxpQnZLdVBLZmRDbWRDbVhZYUxfTjRDel9CVjBnUT09 |
I've never really understood this sort of complaint. Take Al Gore, for example. Al Gore's done more to raise awareness of global warming-related issues than all but a few other people on the planet. As a result of his work, thousands, if not millions, of people are probably much more careful about their environmental footprint than they otherwise would have been. The idea that somehow we should discount Gore's contribution simply because he doesn't walk the walk 100% of the time is absurd.
By way of analogy, suppose that your doctor kept telling you that you needed to eat better and exercise more (as mine does). Say you took that advice to heart and led a better lifestyle, as did many of your doctor's other patients. If it later turned out that your doctor was actually quite sedentary, ate a double-cheeseburger every night, and had high cholesterol, would that invalidate their contribution? Should you stop exercising and eating right because your doctor is a hypocrite? Presumably not. From a utilitarian standpoint, your doctor is doing much more to improve people's health than most other people are.
On balance, unless these 9 celebrities' "huge" carbon footprints are really so large as to offset their contribution to environmental awareness (which seems pretty unlikely), shouldn't we just be grateful that they're doing what they're doing? | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2TVhoM1RuMlI4Z2NIN2s5eGxVb1QyVjFTY3RGdUxHVjNJZWdjRnhEbDdWMmM1bmdyVGJmYXlYS1hUdl9lUmhOamdFcWpZOWVVUDBFY0RtazJRdWpITXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeWQ1VmJtQlhJbGw1eGpMUGs1WVRRc0FWYmxzLWM5Y3A2Q19pUF8xaDAyZzNzZHI0cGRlRG5iSy1zZWVlUnBlbVRMT3VTN0J4QnFfWW5vN1hWU2dCb1ZIR0lCdDFNS0pIRXhJVTN0MHhyTU9oRldhQXhINmZRTG1IdXd5R3dPLWlZdjhpNzVaZUFjSmZ3WHI1U3FHeTFaU29VOFdMTG5ucXRWNGRncW9NQXcxMXF4V18wVHAxTDlLcUFhSUVVTTNidUxrSm91cElHREZHMmxQYmVOSnItUT09 |
With a name like "Private Jets Magazine", you know they have no agenda! | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2dmttc19JTlpFYkptYjJBNF9yUTVUNTVCcFBFYTFVaDJRVXo4SlZtcnJ0OVVHdnJqRUs2S2RQN0NwaWRXcGFUNTdvSDBGMU5qSlVqbzQ3SjZab1F6a0E9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaTU5tQm5PQlNvLUhJcHFqWVdLQllzNE9fVFFSa2VQMmlueEZzUkRJOGFKcDVmWDZ3bFZmMGJSQWg3R1VCWDlGaHBqN1hQUjdQNF9Ea0lPREw5RXpVWllsY0RSOVdvTzZKUXZmaGZFYU9Wc0E0ZWtQcHZ6LW1EZlluNWJMWS02bXNyVThfREV4WS1sY3VPY0F0d3dtV3pjOFRCY1ExWjhaZjVLTG1WQ2NPZHFLTTBkVkVocGE2M24wc2JsakhBRExPUVZiNldnRjZTLXN0X2N5ajZmX3RyZz09 |
You consider celebrities "leaders" ? They just have an impact on what people talk and think about, and if they can make people talk and think about the environment, it doesn't really matter how big their house is, or how often they use their private jet. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RDBDV1F4VEJxTUwyRVdWejRVejEwaUgyNThSRFhwZUVJVDgtVDhmNFNGTDdPV2hfdGxSdHVJZmNMcG1jR2s4NXZQUjdHZG5WRGNIOTNPLWdDcEV3MFE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaeG9hZTNXZEp1ck1NNExSVlNsYUFfVGREdk5aRkdzWkZsWWhxSXlDa21mUDhNXzNobFJKbVZOdzVaVW5LcUF1MG9LTk1CRnQtSC1sOHd4N0xFeHE0aTAzY1Mzb1UwdGdhazE0ajhWWVFZazBsa2IzQkx3Nll2TTk1OVNaVlpKSUNTZ0dGMkwyTVRwWEtjVHd6d2IwNEFnWjRLMnlzQlo3emc5OVlhcUw1ektKN1RxLWFDcVdYSVo3VGU5VE5JZTZ4dDB3U2VFZGFvb2NCMHY2cXdudnFkUT09 |
...but only if you don't know what a hypocrite means. How's spewing out carbon and offsetting it hypocritical? It'd be only hypocritical if they didn't even try to offset their footprint. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2RU8zVzhrR00xa2xYUjNkaHZraVVRa3l6bWhYRGN5VjJNYkRoMFI0UGx2eks3YXl4V0NOMWlmazBuc1Z1VXY0UFZ2eHQ4R2l0RlVFZlA2cnRxOU41dkE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaOWtaMFJLUWh0b05ZdE4xdmlRNUxxNDFzTmpCNzY0QmpFZkJTSFIyY25XejM1ZUdBMkFzbUp4WTBMS0JDXzd5Yi1sN3NSdEYyWXlTcG5EYTlkOUJ3ek44djQ5dFVNaFhOR3FUZW4zNXRWNzRDOUJycmo3YVh4NWlwLVBGX0VzWDY2ODllbjhDVzJXejU3U2RMcy1fWEs0OWFBb2JWelR2UWp5V1B6X2JVZWRPNG5qdTB4MVpQSGtocmc2QnhpcFA1X2JUbENmeWZpTFhjOEtWOVpzYmdpUT09 |
Private Jet Magazine? Hmmm, wonder if they have a motive for making readers feel less guilty about using their planes -- no, can't be, this article must be part of their usual editorial coverage (covering the latest on jets and environmental hypocrisy). Notice how the examples are a combination of innuendo, exaggeration and questionable links to environmental activism (are the Red Hot Chili Peppers really known for their environmental stands)? | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2QlRqczZ2U1NHVlNSVjVra2R4R2hIdW1DS1o0dExVcGFWZjY1am5BOTRsenZTWng2dTJWWm5WYVFFcFVramFlWDhlVjV2UUlkY0wzbzBqWHM4dDFSbXc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaNHdpWGRpMjd2dnFScVpUZkNhMHQ5SGlFVElQWWJpeHhnNDlPOWxjQWxsZzcxWVBnbVRES0YwWGx3RWRkN1JXWUJscTdWR25jcGVEYUJOVDdDVlVMdElBRnJIcnZsb0ZNYXNCRm1HakdEaWlLbEdNV0l5WTFpQXFjNkk4dzVWWnVrdUZEQU1fS0I0T29XVDg4Sk0wSDZrN1ZUZzVWOEtRS1ZmWklYN3hNZThSUWItb0hRNVdjaVlUOHpyd3NFandtVm5kQkVrc3lMMGNqRVhSYmk3X2RuUT09 |
Although somewhat whimsical, the point of the piece should not be missed - namely, supposed "leaders" of the environmentalist movement (and yes, when you throw people like Paltrow and Cruise as spokespersons for your cause in order to raise public awareness, they should be considered "leaders" of your cause) are either too self-absorbed or dumb to mimic the behaviors they preach to the public at large. Either that, or they simply think themselves above the rules that should apply to the common man. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2VkFWTHBXVUFZSVBUWFZDN0QwMWw1aTZtTnlQbXRRV3Q3S0tQelhJM0wtbmNHZ1NLX004OXZCSVE5UFctUGNtSXotMnB1eVpLazJ4cXhncU9rMWRYWmc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaYVViY1VSc3NxYkpWRnJDMHUyY3pJdlBKeGJxZ3NNT3JXSVV5QXZqZ2d2UU1FT3d0VU8yYV9WWFhtZXNMUWRjZGdKRmo3aTVTam9hWWNiTFVQay1JZTllaWZRZDA5RnRyRFNPRGh0b3piM3lqbkFPZ2FsSHgwbGRnNWhydDN1REs2Y0JkVWU1VHdhcjV1Q1B0SDBZQ2ZhSHJNRFc3bDNaUHNtcVpWYkt2S3hXdTNKWWlWQnR6U0x3bEg0TVMtMmlENDNKWHAzcHhHV3ZWdk80U0RTdVR1UT09 |
You mean market capitalism? | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2YzlJcUNNTzNmR2RKcnhuTlZXN0pVZnlXcFFlWFVXczJaR0ltbS1WeWxuT1A2Y3dZWVpEYlE1SExjaHdBeWVSZEJVMGxIM2pSNXNZVWRVNk91d0toVHc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaRjFITnV6V21JRFJTSElVYnZUUG50SGhmVkJIME45bktGYWZSZzZPVm5HWWcyVzUwVDdyUTdFLWEzZ1F0OGt4a19FQnI1N1FIMEFfOVROUkJtUElzNmJtWWpTelZmSVNablB6bVpmM3RQcE9RcEpoZUlIZjRiTzlwOUczSnhzRHlNQ2ZXMTJ6Z1RlaE9xclN2WVVqY0w5VFBfSTdXVWhlZkpBSy1iY3hFaFUxaHMtMlBNNERJdUxBc0NjQV9faGVnTjVCZngxS3dNZDhQTFlhRHRDcUItZz09 |
BREAKING: Celebrities are full of shit! | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2cWdhdi1mM3gyY3R2Z0g1UnU4WnZybWVCWkpfb2pjV3BTQ25tMmFxUUs2N2xYZkNtRHdtSWg4QjVkdUdXa2JpTWI2VzVkcWFpTkp0NjZMQzkzMF9ObEE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaaEVXZlNJVGdkdmdGN3ItT2RFQWUwMUFtdlZqWDdLakJxUjJMaEY1ZmxzMXVTNkNPSjBzbXp3UFRHNEM0b21DN1dqUUtXTFFkTm9Jcm1QbWltbDYwWXRRRWZnZ2JfNk9PS2hqYThkeVR3MnFHeVFVQlhVVkRXbVBpTFMtYXhONkZSNEgtaERLVGFybDZvWHAyVFNDXzNzVS1yR0R0SDQ1STNqQzV1UVhoU1RrNXBSM19USkkxc3F2YkRCUUR3QU13anVPZDExZndVaXNYcWJqYkdhcTMwZz09 |
That's like saying I set your house on fire but I also tried to save it by pissing on the flames. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2MUF4dWFtYnFoaTBmZ1BwVXBRZmlyUXhLb0kxYXM4b3lOYmxxSVpNTE1yalJPNU5rZlNhU2J5T0NjbUthT1hmMmxmU1p0MXh5bHdVNDlha01MWWxlNFE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaZFBscUVHd0dEWXh5RW92NFNoQnpsX1Q1dTlKWDJuYU5oSWstZ2xJc3dBaE16c193bnMxak4zdGl0MzBMUDZrMG9IeEhBc1k5M2VEXzNZc0w0MmZFYi1aU29MZmY5aHpOdlhLeUVhQzNMM2RPRFN5aTJSc1FqQ0pEVElCci1uVXIyVFUwZXdhNzlJNHdNRzlhbnMwQnFERFFvMkdiRTZ3SXlsTkhwZkJnd1l1S3VCdHZDeDNpVWNzQ1F4MXZKZTFXUS00TjVocXNkZVNJcHZCczBuMkliQT09 |
Is that what you call it? Seems alot more like feudalism to me. Al Gore declares that he has a divine right to jets and limos, and the rest of us have to toil in the mud and shit.
"To save planet earth" might as well be "To abide your rightful station in life". | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2cHhZcG1ibDd3UU42LVZNSW1qVnNxcVZiTUxlVng5bEhVbWktTFJvOUZ6RThlUk1nQzVYYmVqVDBsSFREOEhVNmozUEVKd2kzaWItV0dUS1luODJQcGc9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaUHBMSUt2SjVyeVQ0TEVvTWo1SW5Sb01Pcm0zRFEtY1hUbG5GRWtaZkZnMFZ3M01WQVhrS0VpZGxBRGlUMVRzSjRIMjVubWt3U1Y3bkFGMV9BNkczSVhheVdYU0pvcUo2UjFoQWhyaUZDWGRRSENnNlFVT1FUdW5DYlZ1Q0FQYXZ0WUNZbnFDSzZweG13b0xqZl9YNnlNelJVcGtPby1DUXpGZl9fdHFvWUpYeTRBazBYckVMTGIwNHhwVWpjLTJ2dHZDRDhsM3l2MXRkNXdFbmlINFQ3QT09 |
He's setting the example he wants us all to live by: a world in which the elite jaunt around in biodiesel limos and private jets, while you try to hide candles from the Eco Police hoping they'll be enough to keep your kids from freezing to death in the winter.
Of course, maybe if he could get some non-elite to set an example it'd be more effective, but they've yet to train any completely yet. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2M0dBQ0dNaTItbGxEbG9LS1VxRlN1Zk9uTUhsODZTTDFkQTlmYUpuWEdNc3ljX2V1Z3hvX1poOFpvYkJsMXBjcS1RQVJSRkFTLVBWOF8xYlFSUjUzN3c9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaaWdLdHN1V3FkS2JHWThvT1pJT2xOUEVXWHFXSnNxU2pBRF9qNzNHcFBBWTk2b1ozYVpycWlqSGh2QmtHMnZrUTNTT1JiVzZURWNubmlJV24yNnR4VG5RQTk0b1FPMHhHdWtnczN5czd1YTRkRFUySFFWWU9vT0hQNnlhd1BCdzBNdVNfSXczaldaeE9aeWozUVlzeDFWaWhnRE8zZExtbTVfOUJBWnhueEVlQzE2YkdpYjN5OU92RUZKUnJSZi0ydV9vTVUxQUVzR0pES1N4WDNGaFktdz09 |
Carbon offsets are fraud and ought to be considered illegal.
In essence to be able to sell offsets one ought to have to prove that the investment (e.g. building a wind farm, replacing one's light bulb for something more efficient, etc.) underlying the offset would not have taken place without the $30 or whatever that comes from buyers of those offsets.
If the windfarm (or whatever) would have been built anyway, then there is no offset. You have to be credulous in the extreme to believe someone who is building a multimillion dollar green energy plant when they claim that if not for the $10,000 that they got from Al Gore's company, that the windfarm would not have been built.
So no, it is not "at least something". It is worse than something, it allows people to fly private jets (or commit other "bad" behavior) to think that they aren't causing harm (with the underlying assumption that greenhouse gasses are "harm") because someone, somewhere is being greener than they otherwise would have been.
In other words, mythical carbon offsets actually cause more emissions than otherwise would have taken place. | r/environment | comment | r/environment | 2008-07-09 | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmZ2bWxsdllfMEFoRVEzWUp6aFJLTG9hcWxWdDdGSXFQdmxiRUtnNlYwdkstZGV2RXNrdjdJbzJrV05BbGNCN3diaHRlOVdrNHRKUURzU0N1dHA0WHR1YlE9PQ== | Z0FBQUFBQm9OQmdaVkZITUFkUHNtUzJieVA0Y3VfYTJzeDN5UkNyMnVIQXNYT25LaGItbUs2YzJSSUhLMWhIekVjZ1VCMk9oenl2VDd6QjdVWkdLTjRpMGpOQ2RFRFlhYWF0aGNYS1E3UFBqalhlQ0E3eGRtWEpkY3BiOUhhNk1HTjR4YVMyZjQzcXRmb3RaLUVYM2dZOUQzX0dlVWRpOUFVUXgzdXZxX2c5bUpmX1pRNm81ZVJ1N3RFalQzWHJHU3NqY1RnS1hETDNnOUttbmdkTjdQRXNtQlN2QVZsQzNqdz09 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.