• Bear@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    There are logical impossibilities, for example in no universe does 0 = 1, and the same is true for these concepts.

    • meliaesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      The fact that time is relative disproves this already. Our understanding is limited by our ability to perceive.

    • tomi000@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Your example is wrong even in our universe lol. In the trivial ring (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_ring ), 0=1 is true.

      What you are probably imagining when talking about 0 and 1 are their representatives in the “integer ring” or maybe the ring of real numbers. Both are simply definitions made by humans and in no way universal truths.

      • Bear@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        There’s no math that makes 0 = 1. When you cannot see the error it does not mean there is no error.

        • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          How many years have you studied mathematics? If you really believe that, it can’t be more than 2 after high-school.

          Edit: better question: Can you define “equivalence relation”? I don’t want you to be creative, I want the standard definition you come across in any foundations class.

    • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      This is actually wrong. You can have an equivalence relation where 0 is equivalent to 1. Furthermore, in the Trivial Ring (that is, the ring algebra of a single element) the multiplicative identity (written as 1) and the and the additive identity (written as 0) are the same element, and thus in the context of the trivial ring 0=1. Isn’t that fascinating?