The Hole at the Bottom of Math

For those who enjoy pondering the imponderables, this  thought-provoking presentation about theories which we intuitively know to be true shows why they cannot be proven formally.

Truth and Provability are not the same thing at all.

The video contains a lot of interesting information if you are weary of the latest discussion about you-know-what.

Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
32 Comments
very old white guy
very old white guy
May 29, 2021 9:19 am

I decided to shut it off.

Anonymous
Anonymous
May 29, 2021 9:44 am

Didn’t listen to video. But I bet its about Godle.

Thinking a lot about lately having read Karl Denninger as of late.

You need to know the incidence to determine sample size.

How do you know the incidence without enough data?

Austrian Peter
Austrian Peter
  Anonymous
May 29, 2021 10:48 am

Yes it is about Godel. Well predicted Anon. I watched the whole thing and was left confounded. Now I know for certain what I already suspected to be true: I don’t understand mathematics. I had trouble with calculus in ‘additional maths’ classes which I needed because I was studying physics at the time. I left to sell cars in the end!

Austrian Peter
Austrian Peter
  Ghost
May 30, 2021 1:26 am

Thank you very much Ghost for even more education! I am confounded by primes and number theory in general. I ended up becoming an accountant (after selling lots of cars!) but people assume that such a discipline requires math – not true actually.

I also learned a few tricks during my career journey. If you are summing columns of figures both across and vertically, as in a trail balance, and you find a difference – if the difference is divisible by 9, then you are looking for a transposition error. Eg difference is 81 – divides by 9 – therefore look for two numbers reversed.

👻 (ghost)
👻 (ghost)
May 29, 2021 10:36 am
Stucky
Stucky
  👻 (ghost)
May 29, 2021 2:26 pm

I’ve seen that video a couple of times before …. and I watched it again! It’s that good. Moar people should watch it, but 9 minutes is too much to ask for most people. Then again, if we watched every “9 minute” video posted on TBP during one day … we’d need more than 24 hours. Anyway, nice job finding all these vids … I am greatly enjoying them.

razzle
razzle
  👻 (ghost)
May 30, 2021 1:03 am

That is some satanic inversion shit there. Acting like the people complaining about a teacher trying to teach correct math are conservatives and liberal teachers are trying to teach traditional math.

Whoever made that video is sucking Satan’s cock.

Leah
Leah
  razzle
May 31, 2021 1:08 am

Are you sarcing? 2+2 = 4. It doesn’t equal 5 or 22. Left, right, it doesn’t matter. 2+2 = 4. Btw, so does 2 multiplied by 2.

Leah
Leah
  👻 (ghost)
May 31, 2021 1:03 am

The last scene was funny. Good on the teacher.

Ken31
Ken31
May 29, 2021 10:46 am

Math has proofs, science does not. Science has a method for eliminating possibilities. I have yet to read a scientific journal article that ended in “Q.E.D.”

Ken31
Ken31
  Ghost
May 30, 2021 11:55 am

That is what I meant by “eliminating possibilities” without having to explain what null hypothesis is.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
May 29, 2021 11:06 am

Can one honestly say that the infinite divine that makes up everything there is and has ever been, is any different?

Honestly
Honestly
May 29, 2021 11:16 am

Excellent subject!

B. Les White
B. Les White
May 29, 2021 12:33 pm

Watched the video. I concluded, definitively, that i am too dumb for this level of abstraction.

razzle
razzle
  B. Les White
May 30, 2021 1:06 am

Here’s a fun one. Get together with a friend and try to prove to each other that red and blue “look” the same to each other. Not that you can both point to something you agree is blue… but what the “blue” looks like. Provided your friend isn’t color blind of course.

That’ll give you a slightly related idea of the similar problem in math (using something to prove itself).

splurge
splurge
May 29, 2021 12:50 pm

Thank you, Ghost that was a pleasure.

psbindy
psbindy
May 29, 2021 1:00 pm

Euclidian math is excellent for erecting structures that will stand.

This cerebral math is useful for illustrating the limits of our human thinking. By bending back on itself even when our senses perceive straight line motion, straight line logic, we can intuit a matrix within which we’re safely contained. Probably for the safety of whatever might be outside our matrix frequency.

Be humble. Some day we will see things as they are.

Joe
Joe
May 29, 2021 2:18 pm

Thank you, Ghost. I will be visiting Brilliant, probably subscribing. I enjoy learning about my limitations, because then I can work to overcome them. Most recently virology.

Best Regards,

Joe

i forget
i forget
May 29, 2021 5:37 pm

In every other cops & DA’s procedural the line “it’s not what you know, it’s what you can prove” must be uttered at least once.

The bright side of that theoretical safeguard in “the legal system” is obvious.

The dark side, especially as it bleeds out into everyday seemingly non-institutionalized life is fence-sitting noncomittalism pedestalized up to be a pigeon-pirch virtue.

Too complex, can’t really ever know enough, who am I to judge, who am I not to defer to the judges instructions?

Judgement/alism (is judged to be) bad talisman, Taoist farmer (parable) good, “perhaps.”

Soooo the incentive to complexify pays back decide-antonym dividends: look how reasonable, wise, athletic even, I am for carefully assigning weights just so as to balance perfectly on my fence rail balance beam.

But rationalization’s not complicated. Denial’s not complicated. Irresponsibility’s not complicated. Deference & “it’s not my job” aren’t complicated. The desire to be “represented” by a “champion” or taken care of by a “parent” isn’t complicated. Plastic laurels on fixed mantles no competiton zones aren’t complicated.

I, the Jury was a Mickey Spillane title. Mike Hammer was the decomplexifying protagonist. And an ideal/ist that horrifies We, the Hung Jury types. (Which maybe should be We, the not well Hung Jury types.)

Not too complicated: the act of trespass transforms a person into a thing. So does deindivduating (to “complexify”) into a utilitarian gang of bookkeepers.

When that axiom is acted upon, backed up, then polite, respectful, prerogatives-known/embraced, society emerges. When it isn’t, or when that axiom is actively subverted by complexifiers who can’t stand to be made to look bad by decomplexifiers, what’s begot is what’s been begat.

Knew a guy who looked to Euclid in that founding father, or führer, sort of way. And who had no aversion to dropping the name in pursuit of sales & management of solds. He was a geometry geomancer amongst geo metros. When life gives you snakes, it’s a good thing, so don’t make snakeoil – unless you prefer superabundant rodents. Which apparently, many people do prefer: rodents in shiny snake(& shark)skin clothing pitching snakeoils the better to lube away all that ass•ails them.

Unfortunately, ophidiophobia – fear of snakes – engenders the “complexity” of snakeoil sales”people”. Fraud is trespass, so “salesthings” is the correct term. As is “mooches” – the salesthings’ opposite, interlocking, number.

Welcome to the machine. The touring is continuous.

And things like the conjecture of the once prime twin towers will be completely consistent & decidable once those esoteric number systems are declassified by the snakeoil salesthings.

But until then gaps will be plugged & plugs will be gapped to remain as they unadjustably are, whether that be fouled, melted, or Goldilocks – fixed am/pm London – or AI Alicia just right. Hormones to the rescue, hormones to the defeat, whores moaning, either way, “kill those golden geese!”

Interesting vid, Ghost. If I were afflicted with optimism I’d quip the dead horse fantastic that Leo sings about, that light that crackpipes let in:

i forget
i forget
  Ghost
May 30, 2021 3:52 pm

Hi Ghost. Ex Machina is fun, & worth a watch. It’s Prometheus Unbound (Percy) & Frankenstein (Mary), ancient impulse “modernized.”

Matrix in the Skynet with Diamonds, too, has almost got to be the dystopia that control freak utopianism – across scale & up/down continuum – wreaks…even if it never ends up looking exactly like movie versions, Orwell or Huxley visions.

Or the dusted off & polished Westworld (another Crichton story): The good doctor “creators,” let alone everyone else, don’t stand a chance against “their” creations.

Also the symmetrical angle that doppels the gangsters (& ripple effects outwards from them), “explains” motivation, of control freaks sometimes – often? – wanting, at day’s end, to be dominated: the Giamatti character in Billions is U.S.Attorney for the Southern District of New York, powerful, greedy for more, totally corrupt – & a submissive masochist in the bedroom-torture chamber.

Or the classic hero cancelling antihero motivation, as shown again, by Cool Hand Luke, in The Hustler:

But maybe he’s a learner. Implied. There was a sequel.

((Current events. I’ve wanted, ached, to “be among them” at various times over the course of the past year. Even tho I’ve been there, & done that, & been plastered thereby. Compulsions are the gravity that keeps this flat disc stuck spinning in place. “It’s a great feeling.” Oceanic. Swimming out too far just doesn’t seem possible – or, even if it is possible, not important. But it is possible, is important. And contrary the standard advice, not keeping light under a bushel is a good way to get harvested.))

Even the Epstein types, that dominate little girls, etc, push it until something bigger, more dominant, gobbles them up.

This die•namic may be looking into the abyss & not being able to handle it, losing it, worshipping at the altar of Pogo Possum.

Maybe subconscious Opposite George is pulling those strings to get the puppet to self-destruction-fulfilling prophecy.

Yin & Yang are always depicted as weighted equivalently, but seems one is always stronger. Hubris is always stronger. Strongest of all seems Freud’s death wish: that energized bunny doesn’t stop the search until Charlie Bronson is found & “*he*” stops it.

Dmytryk on film editing: Rule One: never make a cut without a positive reason &…never talk about fight club:: death by a thousand, delicious, micro-expression-agression, cuts.

Compulsion, the antithesis of free will pretense-theses, rapist & raped, that begets all the sin•thesis – and all the “distorted introduction to the world” that therapists & bleeding hearts emphasize to exclusion of all else.

But distorted distortion is conception-tortion, twisted helices, & heresies, so all that is, & comes, *before* distortion is parents, who were also distort-conceived -torsioned … & then all that’s left is random rolls of the dice out in tiny tails to get some few apples that fall far from the pursuing trees.

It’s a numbers game.

And game animals are “made legitimate quarry by state or other law.” By predators, iow.

But by now maybe not so black & white & yin & yang, them & us, as that, is it?

“Susceptibility to manipulation….” Sociopaths bent on perfecting sociopathy – & sociopath’d dependent can only want that, too (The Commitments: “Mickah Wallace? I hired him to do the door. Security. You’re mad, Jimmy! He’s a savage! I know he is. But he’s our savage.”).

Artificial people are real, artificial intelligence is real, maybe because artifice is real while art is just a term of for too many.

from your math-myth clip:

I have not seen Splice. I’ll look for it. Some of what I wrote above shows up in what you’ve clipped.

Just started DeLillo’s Zero K. Immortality. Transhumanism. Billionaires.

“I must have the wrong door,” I said. He gave me a hard look. “They’re all the wrong door,“ he said. It took me a while to find my father’s office.”

“When she asked me about the book, I made a gesture of helplessness. The book was a challenge, a secondhand paperback crammed with huge & violent emotions in small crowded type on waterlogged pages. She told me to put it down & pick it up again in three years. But I wanted to read it now, I needed it now, even if I knew I’d never finish. I liked reading books that nearly killed me, books that helped tell me who I was, the son who spites his father by reading such books.”

“I’m aware that when we see something,we are getting only a measure of information, a sense, an inkling of what is really there to see. I don’t know the details or terminology but I do know that the optic nerve is not telling the full truth. We’re seeing only intimations. The rest is our invention, our way of reconstructing what is actual. I know that research is being done here, somewhere in this complex, on future models of human vision. Experiments using robots, lab animals, who knows, people like me.”

“They would come & take her. They would wheel her into an elevator & take her down to one of the so-called numbered levels. She would die, chemically prompted, in a subzero vault, in a highly precise medical procedure guided by mass delusion, by superstition & arrogance & self-deception.”

“Is it any different at home, or on the street, or waiting at the gate to board a flight? I maintain myself on the puppet drug of personal technology. Every touch of a button brings the neural rush of finding something I never knew & never needed to know until it appears at my anxious fingertips, where it remains for a shaky second before disappearing forever.”

“The room in the long empty hall. The chair, the bed, the bare walls, the low ceiling. Sitting in the room & then wandering the halls I could feel myself lapsing into my smallest self, all the vainglorious ideas around me shrunk into personal reverie because what am I in this place but someone in need of self-defense.”
““What we have here is small, painstaking & private. One by one, now & then, people enter the chamber. In an average day, how many? There is no average day. And there is no posturing here. No warping of the body in remorse, submission, obedience, worship. We do not kiss rings or slippers. There are no prayer rugs.”

She sat crouched, one hand grasping the other, each considered phrase an emblem of her dedication, so I chose to think.

“But is there a link to older beliefs & practices? Are we a radical technology that simply renews & extends those swarming traditions of everlasting life?”

Someone on the benches turned & looked my way. It was my father, giving me a slow & knowing nod. Here they are, he seemed to be saying, two of the people whose ideas & theories determine the shape of this endeavor. The vital minds, as he’d described them earlier. And the others, they had to be benefactors, as Ross was, the support mechanism, the money people, seated in this stone room, on backless benches, here to learn something about the philosophical heart of the Convergence.

The man began to speak. There was a tone, a ripple somewhere nearby, & his words, in one of the languages of Central Europe, became a smooth digital genderless English.

“This is the future, this remoteness, this sunken dimension. Solid but also elusive in a way. A set of coordinates mapped from space. And one of our objectives is to establish a consciousness that blends with the environment.””

That’s as far as I’ve gotten. Pretty good.

Walter Johnson
Walter Johnson
May 30, 2021 3:37 pm

Not to be moronic, but isn’t human arithmetic and math base ten? And isn’t the idea of one a base ten construct? Turing reduced math to one and zero to be sure, but all of his results are in the end expressed in base ten.

It is understandable that we use base ten, after all the monkey can hold its hands in front of it to perform number expressions. What if prime numbers are simply an inadequacy in the base ten system? If so, then all our math is just a terribly misguided bookkeeping system worked out by enormous but ultimately completely conventional intelligences who have been largely unable to think beyond the monkey’s ten fingers.