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:

```# Given that: 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