Does PERFECT = IMPERFECT ?
 

I've decided to share my Sunday musings with a few more people other than myself, so here I come !

Does Perfect = Imperfect ?

A typical answer may be " of course not, silly ! ". A more reasoned response may be " no, but what are you trying to say ? ". And then, an hopeful response would be " maybe, if you consider a few limitations ". The best response is, of course, " yes, you are absolutely correct in your assertion, if it's an assertion ".

For example, does a person who stutters = a person who does not stutter. Or to be more clear, does a stuttering person stutter ? Of course, a stuttering person does not stutter !

I know this to be true, because if you ignore all the malformed words or attempts at word formation from a stuttering person, that person speaks perfectly, or just as well as I do, because I do not stutter.

So, by induction, I think, PERFECT = IMPERFECT , if you ignore that which may lead you to think that PERFECT <> IMPERFECT ! ( more than or less than, but not equal ).

And now another " prime " example of this kind of thinking is this:

ZERO = INFINITY

Be careful here, there is a trapdoor !

Zero is isomorphic to infinity with respect to division and multiplication. Equal? no...infiinity is not an identity operator for addition or subtraction.

And certainly noone here would confuse an imperfect number with a perfect number...especially an ODD perfect number. :smile: :leaving:

[QUOTE=9021951;275451]I've decided to share my Sunday musings with a few more people other than myself, so here I come !

Does Perfect = Imperfect ?

A typical answer may be " of course not, silly ! ". A more reasoned response may be " no, but what are you trying to say ? ". And then, an hopeful response would be " maybe, if you consider a few limitations ". The best response is, of course, " yes, you are absolutely correct in your assertion, if it's an assertion ".

For example, does a person who stutters = a person who does not stutter. Or to be more clear, does a stuttering person stutter ? Of course, a stuttering person does not stutter !

I know this to be true, because if you ignore all the malformed words or attempts at word formation from a stuttering person, that person speaks perfectly, or just as well as I do, because I do not stutter.

So, by induction, I think, PERFECT = IMPERFECT , if you ignore that which may lead you to think that PERFECT <> IMPERFECT ! ( more than or less than, but not equal ).

And now another " prime " example of this kind of thinking is this:

ZERO = INFINITY

Be careful here, there is a trapdoor ![/QUOTE]

Just what we need. Another nitwit crank.

Go back to school. Study very hard. When your IQ reaches 50, SELL.
You will make a profit.

[QUOTE=Christenson;275458]Zero is isomorphic to infinity with respect to division and multiplication.
[[/QUOTE]

Total horsesh*t. This is gibberish.

@ 1min 16sec
[YOUTUBE]BqxmLpxUncA[/YOUTUBE]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;275463]Total horsesh*t. This is gibberish.[/QUOTE]

Let me re-phrase: (I've been working problems out of Leveque's number theory book, but didn't quite get my proper mathematical hat on....)
Under the map R*-->1/R*, where R* is the real numbers with infinity added,
the operations of multiplication and division are preserved, with zero mapped to infinity and vice-versa.
This map is 1 to 1 and onto. and therefore is an isomorphism.

What did I miss? Surely isomorphisms aren't limited to rings, though they may be more useful there...

[QUOTE=9021951;275451]So, by induction, I think, PERFECT = IMPERFECT , if you ignore that which may lead you to think that PERFECT <> IMPERFECT ! ( more than or less than, but not equal )[/QUOTE]

Yeah. And 1 = 2, if you ignore the extra 1 that is causing the 2 to not be equal to 1. :huh:

EDIT:- btw, there is a poll in there, if anyone cares.

[QUOTE=9021951;275451]Does Perfect = Imperfect ?[/QUOTE]Yes it does ... but only if you live in Wonderland with Alice. And you can even extend your argument to "anyOneThing = anyOtherThing", you just have to make sure you ignore all the things where anyOneThing != anyOtherThing and, eureka, you will find that anyOneThing = anyOtherThing. :loco:

[size=1]For the poll - I was looking for the fifth option: Wish I hadn't clicked on this topic.[/size]

You need to watch Flatlander's video up there....really...

[QUOTE=Christenson;275471]Let me re-phrase: (I've been working problems out of Leveque's number theory book, but didn't quite get my proper mathematical hat on....)
Under the map R*-->1/R*, where R* is the real numbers with infinity added,
the operations of multiplication and division are preserved, with zero mapped to infinity and vice-versa.
This map is 1 to 1 and onto. and therefore is an isomorphism.

What did I miss? Surely isomorphisms aren't limited to rings, though they may be more useful there...[/QUOTE]

You need to state that you are working in the EXTENDED REALS and not
the REALS.

[QUOTE=Christenson;275509]You need to watch Flatlander's video up there....really...[/QUOTE]I've no flash player here. Perhaps you could explain what you are referring to?