It all started when I made the argument that eternity does not exist because eternity is an infinity and infinities do not exist in the real world. Since Deepsight and Anony believe that god is eternal, they had to challenge me on my stance about infinity.

Deep Sight said that numbers (eg 1, 2, 3) exist in real life and they are infinite. I countered that numbers were infinite but they do not exist in real life. Anony supported Deepsight



The argument is simple. Numbers are idealogical contructs we use in measuring or counting things. They do not exist in real life. Numbers are only units of measurement.

So also does your brain not exist in real life only in measurement of stupidity can we say it exist lol just kidding

Does number exist scientifically?

If your answer is yes then we scientifically you have just proven infinity if no then we really can't help you.

That's that.

Eternity just means something you cannot point its end. Simple.

vedaxcool: So also does your brain not exist in real life only in measurement of stupidity can we say it exist lol just kidding

Does number exist scientifically?

If your answer is yes then we scientifically you have just proven infinity if no then we really can't help you.

That's that.

Eternity just means something you cannot point its end. Simple.

Numbers do not exist. End of story.

Which one is scientifically exist? What kind of mumbo jumbo are you trying, retardeen?

Eternity is still an infinite with your simple definition

MacDaddy01:


Numbers do not exist. End of story.

Which one is scientifically exist? What kind of mumbo jumbo are you trying, retardeen?

Eternity is still an infinite with your simple definition

Logic boy...Certainly numbers do not have a tangible existence in the world. Rather they exist in our collective consciousness, and yet they are not arbitrary products of our imaginations in the way that fictional characters are.

So permit me to say that numbers do have some sort of objective existence, even though not a tangible existence.

@ MacMumu
Frustration on a wednesday night must be really eating deep into your skull!

Anyway, your head must hurt from all the belittlement you got from the Pink Unicorn Thread.


I ask this simple question, can Science do without numbers? Pls answer yes or no. And then justify your answer.


Another simple way of ridiculing u is we ask, do you think the world can ever run out of Music notes or lyrics to play? Infinity is not quite far away afterall.

CrazyMan:
Logic boy...Certainly numbers do not have a tangible existence in the world. Rather they exist in our collective consciousness, and yet they are not arbitrary products of our imaginations in the way that fictional characters are.

So permit me to say that numbers do have some sort of objective existence, even though not a tangible existence.

What kind of nonsense is this?

Numbers do no exist.

Which one is objective existence? So do binary numbers exist? Does 70kg exist?

No....they are ideological constructs for measurements. It is like saying square root exists or inches exist.


They do not exist.


Try as you want to lie but they do not exist.

vedaxcool: @ MacMumu
Frustration on a wednesday night must be really eating deep into your skull!

Anyway, your head must hurt from all the belittlement you got from the Pink Unicorn Thread.


I ask this simple question, can Science do without numbers? Pls answer yes or no. And then justify your answer.


Another simple way of ridiculing u is we ask, do you think the world can ever run out of Music notes or lyrics to play? Infinity is not quite far away afterall.

Oh, that thread where you were supporting Deepsight who was arrogant to call one of the best scientists in America foolish on his own area of expertise? LMAO



There are limited notes/sounds on any music organ or any beat making software. Common sense would have told you that.

As for lyrics, words are finite. There are a limited number of words one can use. You are limited to any language or languages you use. Numerous words but limited.

As for science using numbers, does that make the numbers exist? No. Science uses many models for their calculations. There are many 2 dimensional models of the earth. Is the world 2 dimensional? No. Does a 2 dimensional earth exist?

MacDaddy01:



Oh, that thread where you were supporting Deepsight who was arrogant to call one of the best scientists in America foolish on his own area of expertise? LMAO



There are limited notes/sounds on any music organ or any beat making software. Common sense would have told you that.

As for lyrics, words are finite. There are a limited number of words one can use. You are limited to any language or languages you use. Numerous words but limited.

As for science using numbers, does that make the numbers exist? No. Science uses many models for their calculations. There are many 2 dimensional models of the earth. Is the world 2 dimensional? No. Does a 2 dimensional earth exist?

Still can't answer can science do without numbers? please answer with a simple yes or no.

vedaxcool:

Still can't answer can science do without numbers? please answer with a simple yes or no.

What does that question have to do with the existence of numbers?

Science needs numbers of course.

MacDaddy01:


What does that question have to do with the existence of numbers?

Science needs numbers of course.

How difficult is it to answer can Science do without numbers?

Offcourse the only thing wrong is that, Science cannot be without numbers, Science literally revoles around numbers without numbers there is not Science, in lame man terms if numbers don't exist then Science is one big fraud indeed! keep dodging answering simple questions.

Thread dismissed!

@MacDaddy is right by "Numbers do not exist" but he used a contradictory example of 70kg which of course exists. 70kg is a concrete & unique entity, it is tangible and self-existent while pure numbers are just "languages"\logical constructs and not self-existent. @MacDaddy should learn to make proper & thorough arguments, try to be consistent...

vedaxcool:

How difficult is it to answer can Science do without numbers?

Offcourse the only thing wrong is that, Science cannot be without numbers, Science literally revoles around numbers without numbers there is not Science, in lame man terms if numbers don't exist then Science is one big fraud indeed! keep dodging answering simple questions.

Thread dismissed!

Retar.ded logic from a retardeen!


Science uses numbers and therefore, numbers exist?

Let us examine the epic fails

1) Mirror argument- science uses a 2 dimensional model of the aerth and therefore a 2-dimensional earth exists or science uses an equator therefore, an equator exists

2) Numbers are ideological constructs, they dont exist. As a muslim, Qiblah doesnt exist in reality or can you tell me how to face Mecca from space? Qibla is only an ideology.

okeyxyz: @MacDaddy is right by "Numbers do not exist" but he used a contradictory example of 70kg which of course exists. 70kg is a concrete & unique entity, it is tangible and self-existent while pure numbers are just "languages"\logical constructs and not self-existent. @MacDaddy should learn to make proper & thorough arguments, try to be consistent...

70kg does not exist. Dont be foolish. It is my body that exists not the 70kg.

a) On another scale, I would weigh 11 stone. Does the 11 stone also exist? What about 70,000 grams?
b) On another scale. I would weigh 71 kg or even 69 kg. Does it exist?
c) What exists actually, the 70 or the Kilograms? Or both?

MacDaddy01:


70kg does not exist. Dont be foolish. It is my body that exists not the 70kg.

a) On another scale, I would weigh 11 stone. Does the 11 stone also exist? What about 70,000 grams?
b) On another scale. I would weigh 71 kg or even 69 kg. Does it exist?
c) What exists actually, the 70 or the Kilograms? Or both?

In thinking you are smart, You display your ignorance..
70kg is not a weight, it is a mass. 70kg on earth is the same 70kg in space or in water.

^^^^
Mass is material, numbers are not. Get the difference??

okeyxyz:

In thinking you are smart, You display your ignorance..
70kg is not a weight, it is a mass. 70kg on earth is the same 70kg in space or in water. It is self-existent.

After losing the logical battle mand being debunked you play another strawman!


a) 70kg is weight- I am talking colloqially. Am I supposed to say that "I mass 70kg" or "I weigh 70kg"? Dumbazz

b) Depending on the scale I use; A bathroom scale is less accurate than the ones used for sports or the ones for health. They would all give different readings. That is the point that I was trying to make. Ode

okeyxyz: ^^^^
Mass is material, numbers are not. Get the difference??

Dopekeys,

That mass you are talking about is my body and not the 70kg. The number and the grams do not exist.

MacDaddy01:
After losing the logical battle mand being debunked you play another strawman!

a) 70kg is weight- I am talking colloqially. Am I supposed to say that "I mass 70kg" or "I weigh 70kg"? Dumbazz

b) Depending on the scale I use; A bathroom scale is less accurate than the ones used for sports or the ones for health. They would all give different readings. That is the point that I was trying to make. Ode

What are you doing "talking colloquially" in a technical debate You defeat yourself. Like I said before: try and be consistent, only then would you make better arguments.

Mass is material, numbers are not. If i say to you "give me 70kg.." you can produce 70kg, no matter the material or location\circumstance, you wouldn't need further info from me. But if I say to you "give me 70.." then you'd have to ask "70 what?.." so 70 on it's own does not exist, but 70kg is a fully qualified, concrete entity, no matter the situation. it is self-existent, you can't argue that it is abstract.

okeyxyz:

What are you doing "talking colloquially" in a technical debate You defeat yourself. Like I said before: try and be consistent, only then would you make better arguments.

Mass is material, numbers are not. If i say to you "give me 70kg.." you can produce 70kg, no matter the material or location\circumstance, you wouldn't need further info from me. But if I say to you "give me 70.." then you'd have to ask "70 what?.." so 70 on it's own does not exist, but 70kg is a fully qualified, concrete entity, no matter the situation. it is self-existent, you can't argue that it is abstract.

Ode. What should I have said? I MASS 70kg instead of I WEIGH 70kg? Dont irritate me with such foolishness!


70 and 70kg are both meaningless and abstract unless there is a noun succeeding it.


70 of what? 70kg of what?

mass of something is material. Get your points straight.

MacDaddy01:

Dopekeys,

That mass you are talking about is my body and not the 70kg. The number and the grams do not exist.

@bolded, you need to go back to secondary school!!!

okeyxyz:

@bolded, you need to go back to secondary school!!!

words of a debunked man.

Guess I'm too much for you.


You could have avoided this by agreeing with me 100% in the first place but you just had to undermine a part of my argument to appease your chirstian bias.

MacDaddy01:
Ode. What should I have said? I MASS 70kg instead of I WEIGH 70kg? Dont irritate me with such foolishness!

If you don't know how to use technical language, then don't start technical debates. stick to pure religion/philosophy.

MacDaddy01:
70 and 70kg are both is meaningless and abstract unless there is a noun succeeding it.

Are you serious?? So Kg/kilogram is not a noun?? cheii

MacDaddy01:
70 of what? 70kg of what?

mass of something is material. Get your points straight.

You are loosing it maaan!!!! go back to secondary school

okeyxyz:

If you don't know how to use technical language, then don't start technical debates. stick to pure religion/philosophy.

Answer the question. What should i have said- I MASS 70kg or I WEIGH 70kg?

okeyxyz:
Are you serious?? So Kg/kilogram is not a noun?? cheii

Was that my statement? You trolling? 70kg is meaningless unless there is something attached to it. hat is the point, dumbazz!

okeyxyz:
You are loosing it maaan!!!! go back to secondary school

SMH

MacDaddy01:
Was that my statement? You trolling? 70kg is meaningless unless there is something attached to it. hat is the point, dumbazz!

If at this age and era you fail to realize that 70kg is sufficient information, smh. Can I advise you to change your attention to the "romans" section of nairaland.

okeyxyz: If at this age and era you fail to realize that 70kg is sufficient information, smh. Can I advise you to change your attention to the "romans" section of nairaland.

70kg of what? Dumbazz!


Stop trying too hard to be disingenuous! You are not as deceptive as Anony. That guy is a mental houdini!

Seriously, debating you is like arguing with a child. When you don't get your way, you simply curse and throw tantrums, trying to derail the subject. But you don't fool me. Stick with the subject. Is 70kg abstract or concrete?? it does not need further qualification. Whatever you produce, all i need is 70kg, the object or circumstances is irrelevant.

okeyxyz: Seriously, debating you is like arguing with a child. When you don't get your way, you simply curse and throw tantrums, trying to derail the subject. But you don't fool me. Stick with the subject. Is 70kg abstract or concrete?? it does not need further qualification. Whatever you produce, all i need is 70kg, the object or circumstances is irrelevant.

70kg is meaningless. Just like then number 70.

How can you say 70kg exists?

If i say i need 70, whatever you produce, i need 70 of it. Still makes no sense. You need an object.


How can 70kg exist? The number 70kg exists? is it the number that is confusing you? how about 0.000075kg, does that exist too?

MacDaddy01:
70kg is meaningless. Just like then number 70.
How can you say 70kg exists?
If i say i need 70, whatever you produce, i need 70 of it. Still makes no sense. You need an object.

How can 70kg exist? The number 70kg exists? is it the number that is confusing you? how about 0.000075kg, does that exist too?

Kg is mass, mass is matter(Remember the secondary school definition??). Unless you are saying: matter does not exist.

When i say "give me 70kg" Whatever you bring, whether apples or a mixture of apples, tomatoes, water, rubbish, you can even throw in a dead body if you like, The material is irrelevant, the circumstance is irrelevant, the location(whether on earth, in the sun, in space, etc) is irrelevant. kg(mass) is independent of any conditions. It is matter. Simples!!!

okeyxyz:

Kg is mass, mass is matter(Remember the secondary school definition??). Unless you are saying: matter does not exist.

When i say "give me 70kg" Whatever you bring, whether apples or a mixture of apples, tomatoes, water, rubbish, you can even through in a dead body if you like, The material is irrelevant, the circumstance is irrelevant, the location(whether on earth, in the sun, in space, etc) is irrelevant. kg(mass) is independent of any conditions. It is matter. Simples!!!

Am I only seeing the problems that dopkeyz is overlooking?


The apples exist, the tomatoes exist, the water exists however the 70kg can not exist unless it is attached to the materials.


Let me put it into perspective. 7cm....does it exist? 7cm is lenght. But length of what? Is it sufficient to say length exists? My height remains the same everywhere.


Mass is nothing unless it is attached to something because it is not the lenght that exist but the object itself.

Btw, who is the coward that has been "liking" your ignorant posts?