On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 8:07 AM Wes Turner wes.turner@gmail.com wrote:
So you're arguing that the scalar is irrelevant? That `2*inf == inf`?
I disagree because: ```2*inf > inf```
On what basis? If you start by assuming that infinity is a number, then sure, you're going to deduce that double it must be a greater number. But you're just concluding your own assumption, not proving anything.
And:
inf / inf = 1
Is that the case?
from math import inf inf / inf
nan
# When we solve for symbol x: 2*inf*x = inf 2*x = 1 x = 1/2
# If we discard the scalar instead: 2*inf*x = inf inf*x = inf x = 1
# I think it's specious to argue that there are infinity solutions; that axioms of symbolic mathematics do not apply because infinity
Once again, you start by assuming that infinity is a number, and that you can divide by it (which is what happens when you "solve for x" by removing the infinities). You can't prove something by first assuming it.
"Infinity" isn't a number. In the IEEE 754 system, it is a value, but it's still not a number (although it's distinct from Not A Number, just to confuse everyone). In mathematics, it's definitely not an actual number or value.
ChrisA