Jump to content

What level do you think the gods would be?


Zachneap

Recommended Posts

Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

 

 

 

 

 

What perfec doesn't understand is, that infinite isn't necessarily such a large number. For example, between 0 to 1, there are infinite numbers. In addition, between 1 and 2 there are also infinit numbers.

 

 

 

Now, even though infinite, you must agree that the infinity between 0 to 1 isn't as big as the infinity between 0 to 3, not to mention 0 to say... 1M.

 

 

 

In conclusion, although infinite cannot be measured, there are sizes to it, and you can't say that 0 is bigger than 3, 64, or 1,000 only because it's infinite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, in set theory there exist different 'sizes' of infinity (hence my Cantor comment a few pages ago). The cardinality of the natural numbers is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png, for example, and the cardinality of the real numbers is 2^be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png = 9bc9d952e0d3fb65351053e08b3dfe0a.png.

 

 

 

What people almost always mean by infinity in an informal or -- very often -- a scientific context is the definition in real analysis which is infinity as an unbounded limit (to put it loosely, a number larger than every other number) so it's easier to assume that definition unless context dictates otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would be easy to find out if we only knew luciencs combat -.- simply add his combat level to the combat that you would get from the stone of jas, 255 in every skill. and you would get the minimum combat for a god. maby max if he ovverthrows zammy.

 

 

 

also considering that guthix needed the stone of jas's power, the measly extra 300 or so levels, they couldn't really be over 1000 as people keep saying.

 

 

 

finding the combat levels for jas and the elders however... what would the combat level of someone who can afford to waste 300 levels on creating an object that really has no purpose except to be used by other god wanna be's be??

michel555555.png

[spoiler=click you know you wanna]
Me behave? Seriously? As a child I saw Tarzan almost naked, Cinderella arrived home from a party after midnight, Pinocchio told lies, Aladin was a thief, Batman drove over 200 miles an hour, Snow White lived in a house with seven men, Popeye smoked a pipe and had tattoos, Pac man ran around to digital music while eating pills that enhanced his performance, and Shaggy and Scooby were mystery solving hippies who always had the munchies. The fault is not mine! if you had this childhood and loved it put this in your signature!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

 

 

 

 

 

What perfec doesn't understand is, that infinite isn't necessarily such a large number. For example, between 0 to 1, there are infinite numbers. In addition, between 1 and 2 there are also infinit numbers.

 

 

 

Now, even though infinite, you must agree that the infinity between 0 to 1 isn't as big as the infinity between 0 to 3, not to mention 0 to say... 1M.

 

 

 

In conclusion, although infinite cannot be measured, there are sizes to it, and you can't say that 0 is bigger than 3, 64, or 1,000 only because it's infinite.

 

 

 

I am not going into the intimate details of infinite but from my understanding of it is never ending, so your saying there is a never ending list of numbers between 0 and 1? :shame:

 

 

 

There might be googolplexian or more numbers between them but you would eventually get to 1.

 

 

 

I think of it like and FPS, if you have infinite ammo, there isn't an enormous amount of it, there is no limit.

perfetc_666.png

 

IM GOING TO LIVE FOREVER .......... or die trying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

 

 

 

 

 

What perfec doesn't understand is, that infinite isn't necessarily such a large number. For example, between 0 to 1, there are infinite numbers. In addition, between 1 and 2 there are also infinit numbers.

 

 

 

Now, even though infinite, you must agree that the infinity between 0 to 1 isn't as big as the infinity between 0 to 3, not to mention 0 to say... 1M.

 

 

 

In conclusion, although infinite cannot be measured, there are sizes to it, and you can't say that 0 is bigger than 3, 64, or 1,000 only because it's infinite.

 

 

 

I am not going into the intimate details of infinite but from my understanding of it is never ending, so your saying there is a never ending list of numbers between 0 and 1? :shame:

 

 

 

There might be googolplexian or more numbers between them but you would eventually get to 1.

 

 

 

I think of it like and FPS, if you have infinite ammo, there isn't an enormous amount of it, there is no limit.

 

 

 

Man dont fail, there is an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1. from 0,1 to 0,000000000001 to 0,00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001, Get it now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[hide=Wall of quotes]

Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

 

 

 

 

 

What perfec doesn't understand is, that infinite isn't necessarily such a large number. For example, between 0 to 1, there are infinite numbers. In addition, between 1 and 2 there are also infinit numbers.

 

 

 

Now, even though infinite, you must agree that the infinity between 0 to 1 isn't as big as the infinity between 0 to 3, not to mention 0 to say... 1M.

 

 

 

In conclusion, although infinite cannot be measured, there are sizes to it, and you can't say that 0 is bigger than 3, 64, or 1,000 only because it's infinite.

 

 

 

I am not going into the intimate details of infinite but from my understanding of it is never ending, so your saying there is a never ending list of numbers between 0 and 1? :shame:

 

 

 

There might be googolplexian or more numbers between them but you would eventually get to 1.

 

 

 

I think of it like and FPS, if you have infinite ammo, there isn't an enormous amount of it, there is no limit.

[/hide]

 

 

 

Of course there are infinite numbers between 1 and 0. You can add as many numbers after the dot, and will still not get 1, as long as before the dot there is a 0.

 

 

 

examples:

 

0.1

 

0.000000000000000000000000000006

 

0.1567863542135498756423545778995461

 

0.09

 

0.0000000000000000000500000000000000000000000000000001

 

 

 

These are not even close to the length these numbers can get to. Haven't you ever been to school? It's pretty much basic stuff...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[hide=Wall of quotes]
Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

 

 

 

 

 

What perfec doesn't understand is, that infinite isn't necessarily such a large number. For example, between 0 to 1, there are infinite numbers. In addition, between 1 and 2 there are also infinit numbers.

 

 

 

Now, even though infinite, you must agree that the infinity between 0 to 1 isn't as big as the infinity between 0 to 3, not to mention 0 to say... 1M.

 

 

 

In conclusion, although infinite cannot be measured, there are sizes to it, and you can't say that 0 is bigger than 3, 64, or 1,000 only because it's infinite.

 

 

 

I am not going into the intimate details of infinite but from my understanding of it is never ending, so your saying there is a never ending list of numbers between 0 and 1? :shame:

 

 

 

There might be googolplexian or more numbers between them but you would eventually get to 1.

 

 

 

I think of it like and FPS, if you have infinite ammo, there isn't an enormous amount of it, there is no limit.

[/hide]

 

 

 

Of course there are infinite numbers between 1 and 0. You can add as many numbers after the dot, and will still not get 1, as long as before the dot there is a 0.

 

 

 

examples:

 

0.1

 

0.000000000000000000000000000006

 

0.1567863542135498756423545778995461

 

0.09

 

0.0000000000000000000500000000000000000000000000000001

 

 

 

These are not even close to the length these numbers can get to. Haven't you ever been to school? It's pretty much basic stuff...

 

 

 

Do you not know what googolplexian is? cos I pretty much said exactly what you just said except, I think that if you counted these numbers for millennia then you would eventually get to 1 from 0, which to me means it isn't infinite.

perfetc_666.png

 

IM GOING TO LIVE FOREVER .......... or die trying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you not know what googolplexian is? cos I pretty much said exactly what you just said except, I think that if you counted these numbers for millennia then you would eventually get to 1 from 0, which to me means it isn't infinite.

 

 

 

There are no instances of, "Well, it means this to me!" here: these are facts. Look at it this way (yes, I'm going to lift the argument pretty much verbatim from Wikipedia).

 

 

 

In mathematics there exists a construct known as a set, and a whole branch of mathematics has evolved around this construct: set theory. A set is a simple thing, really: it's just a collection of objects. For example, {1,2,3} is a set, as is {6,15,415,3.1415926} or {x,y,z}.

 

 

 

It seems intuitively obvious that each set has a size: for example, the first and last sets above have three elements, and the second has four. The set {4,7,2,6,2} has five and {} has none.. The size of a set is called its cardinality. Now, think about the natural numbers (the positive integers 1, 2, 3, ...). Can these be expressed in a set? Sure they can: {1, 2, 3, ...}. It's immediately obvious that we cannot list all of the natural numbers and have to condense them as shown: there are infinitely many!

 

 

 

For a set with infinitely many elements, does it make sense to talk about its cardinality? The answer is yes. However, we need to extend our number systems to cope with this and this formed the cardinal numbers. The smallest cardinal number is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png, 'Aleph-null'. be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png is the cardinality of set of natural numbers.

 

 

 

Now, think about the real numbers. How many real numbers are there? You might say, "If the cardinality of the natural numbers is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png and the set of real numbers is infinite too, then there must be be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png real numbers!", but you would be wrong. For each real number, there is an infinite decimal expansion. For example:

 

1/3 = 0.3333333333...

 

Pi = 3.1415926...

 

1/2 = 0.5000000000...

 

 

 

The digits of the expansion are in a one to one correspondence with the natural numbers: each digit describes one and only one natural number, and that natural number describes that digit only. We know that the cardinality of the natural numbers is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png, so each expansion has be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png digits.

 

 

 

This is true regardless of the mathematical base used, and the argument is simplest in base 2: binary. Each digit of the expansion must be a 0 or a 1, and there are be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png digits. This means that there 2^be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png ways to fill the expansion. This number is aleph-1.

 

 

 

It can be proved that be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png < aleph-1, but I'm running short on time -- look it up yourself if you're interested. The point is that while there are infinitely many real numbers and infinitely many natural numbers, there are 'more' real numbers than there are natural numbers. You can count forever between 1 and 2, but you will never cover all numbers in between them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you not know what googolplexian is? cos I pretty much said exactly what you just said except, I think that if you counted these numbers for millennia then you would eventually get to 1 from 0, which to me means it isn't infinite.

 

 

 

There are no instances of, "Well, it means this to me!" here: these are facts. Look at it this way (yes, I'm going to lift the argument pretty much verbatim from Wikipedia).

 

 

 

In mathematics there exists a construct known as a set, and a whole branch of mathematics has evolved around this construct: set theory. A set is a simple thing, really: it's just a collection of objects. For example, {1,2,3} is a set, as is {6,15,415,3.1415926} or {x,y,z}.

 

 

 

It seems intuitively obvious that each set has a size: for example, the first and last sets above have three elements, and the second has four. The set {4,7,2,6,2} has five and {} has none.. The size of a set is called its cardinality. Now, think about the natural numbers (the positive integers 1, 2, 3, ...). Can these be expressed in a set? Sure they can: {1, 2, 3, ...}. It's immediately obvious that we cannot list all of the natural numbers and have to condense them as shown: there are infinitely many!

 

 

 

For a set with infinitely many elements, does it make sense to talk about its cardinality? The answer is yes. However, we need to extend our number systems to cope with this and this formed the cardinal numbers. The smallest cardinal number is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png, 'Aleph-null'. be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png is the cardinality of set of natural numbers.

 

 

 

Now, think about the real numbers. How many real numbers are there? You might say, "If the cardinality of the natural numbers is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png and the set of real numbers is infinite too, then there must be be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png real numbers!", but you would be wrong. For each real number, there is an infinite decimal expansion. For example:

 

1/3 = 0.3333333333...

 

Pi = 3.1415926...

 

1/2 = 0.5000000000...

 

 

 

The digits of the expansion are in a one to one correspondence with the natural numbers: each digit describes one and only one natural number, and that natural number describes that digit only. We know that the cardinality of the natural numbers is be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png, so each expansion has be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png digits.

 

 

 

This is true regardless of the mathematical base used, and the argument is simplest in base 2: binary. Each digit of the expansion must be a 0 or a 1, and there are be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png digits. This means that there 2^be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png ways to fill the expansion. This number is aleph-1.

 

 

 

It can be proved that be4c703ed73456618ed283b892c6715a.png < aleph-1, but I'm running short on time -- look it up yourself if you're interested. The point is that while there are infinitely many real numbers and infinitely many natural numbers, there are 'more' real numbers than there are natural numbers. You can count forever between 1 and 2, but you will never cover all numbers in between them.

 

 

 

I read the first paragraph and thought, "I am not going to read any of this" and if this is really important to you then I think you better not come on the internet for sometime.

 

 

 

All you have done is go onto a website made by people who could be a bunch of 12 year olds making stuff up or by highly intelligent people, although intelligent people probably have better things to do than edit some website.

 

 

 

Seriously, do you even understand what you have just copy and pasted from wiki? Or did you just read it trying desperately to make sense of it, in the end not getting the vast majority of it but thought "this will make me sound clever" so you highlighted everything and pasted it here, with your own little sentence at the start and hit submit? Cos I bet it was the second.

 

 

 

I am not trying to sound nasty, try and put some your own thoughts into it.

perfetc_666.png

 

IM GOING TO LIVE FOREVER .......... or die trying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the first paragraph and thought, "I am not going to read any of this" and if this is really important to you then I think you better not come on the internet for sometime.

 

 

 

All you have done is go onto a website made by people who could be a bunch of 12 year olds making stuff up or by highly intelligent people, although intelligent people probably have better things to do than edit some website.

 

 

 

Seriously, do you even understand what you have just copy and pasted from wiki? Or did you just read it trying desperately to make sense of it, in the end not getting the vast majority of it but thought "this will make me sound clever" so you highlighted everything and pasted it here, with your own little sentence at the start and hit submit? Cos I bet it was the second.

 

 

 

I am not trying to sound nasty, try and put some your own thoughts into it.

 

 

 

Uh, sorry for having an active interest in mathematics and reading through valid proofs of the various arguments proposed by Georg Cantor and only getting the material I used there from Wikipedia because I was on a time constraint and I knew the majority of people here couldn't care less about cardinality?

 

 

 

FYI, it's not copy-pasted and I understand every word, thanks: I followed the structure because, as I said above, most people here couldn't give two [cabbage]s about the stuff and I was on a time constraint. Hell, I tried to make the material as informal as possible so people could easily understand it without Googling away for the next three hours. Whatever; all I was trying to do was shed some light on an interesting topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the first paragraph and thought, "I am not going to read any of this" and if this is really important to you then I think you better not come on the internet for sometime.

 

 

 

All you have done is go onto a website made by people who could be a bunch of 12 year olds making stuff up or by highly intelligent people, although intelligent people probably have better things to do than edit some website.

 

 

 

Seriously, do you even understand what you have just copy and pasted from wiki? Or did you just read it trying desperately to make sense of it, in the end not getting the vast majority of it but thought "this will make me sound clever" so you highlighted everything and pasted it here, with your own little sentence at the start and hit submit? Cos I bet it was the second.

 

 

 

I am not trying to sound nasty, try and put some your own thoughts into it.

 

 

 

Uh, sorry for having an active interest in mathematics and reading through valid proofs of the various arguments proposed by Georg Cantor and only getting the material I used there from Wikipedia because I was on a time constraint and I knew the majority of people here couldn't care less about cardinality?

 

 

 

FYI, it's not copy-pasted and I understand every word, thanks: I followed the structure because, as I said above, most people here couldn't give two [cabbage] about the stuff and I was on a time constraint. Hell, I tried to make the material as informal as possible so people could easily understand it without Googling away for the next three hours. Whatever; all I was trying to do was shed some light on an interesting topic.

 

 

 

I am only 1 person and I usually find really boring things interesting but that could put me to sleep, I would find it hard to belive any body is interested in the intimate details of infinite, it will never help you in life and since you have less than 35 years in total to live it, I consider it a waste of time and totaly irrelevant to the thread.

 

 

 

The gods of runescape probably have the ourobouros symbol as there level but defining infinite is off topic.

 

 

 

How about instead of infinite we just say unlimited.

perfetc_666.png

 

IM GOING TO LIVE FOREVER .......... or die trying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am only 1 person and I usually find really boring things interesting but that could put me to sleep, I would find it hard to belive any body is interested in the intimate details of infinite, it will never help you in life and since you have less than 35 years in total to live it, I consider it a waste of time and totaly irrelevant to the thread.

 

 

 

Most games will never help you in life but millions of people play those for hours a day. I just found it an interesting aside and it's irritating when people think there is a finite amount of numbers between any two given values, but whatever; I've said pretty much everything I have to say here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would be easy to find out if we only knew luciencs combat -.- simply add his combat level to the combat that you would get from the stone of jas, 255 in every skill. and you would get the minimum combat for a god. maby max if he ovverthrows zammy.

 

 

 

also considering that guthix needed the stone of jas's power, the measly extra 300 or so levels, they couldn't really be over 1000 as people keep saying.

 

 

 

finding the combat levels for jas and the elders however... what would the combat level of someone who can afford to waste 300 levels on creating an object that really has no purpose except to be used by other god wanna be's be??

 

Lucien is lvl. 14 and has 1 hp actually and lives next door to g.e., just see for yourself.

FaladorTavern-2.png

TheMather1.jpg

Twitter:

@TheMather1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[hide=Wall of quotes]
Thats because my windows calculator cant display infinite. lets say you divide 1 by 10^-99, the number coming out would be immensly large, get closer to zero and it will only get larger, thus zero is infinite

 

 

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

 

Yes, %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E%2B%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20%2B%20%5Cinfty.gif, but %5CLARGE%5C%21%5Clim_%7Bx%20%5Cto%200%5E-%7D%20%5Cfrac%7Bn%7D%7Bx%7D%20%3D%20-%20%5Cinfty.gif. The numbers are different depending on whether x increases towards 0 or decreases towards 0; the limit is not equal on both sides.

 

 

 

Sure, you could go ahead and create an 'unsigned' infinity and use the real projective line, but since this isn't a field division doesn't even keep the meaning that you're probably familiar with in it.

 

 

 

(forgive the dodgy Latex; it's the first thing Google spat out)

 

 

 

 

 

What perfec doesn't understand is, that infinite isn't necessarily such a large number. For example, between 0 to 1, there are infinite numbers. In addition, between 1 and 2 there are also infinit numbers.

 

 

 

Now, even though infinite, you must agree that the infinity between 0 to 1 isn't as big as the infinity between 0 to 3, not to mention 0 to say... 1M.

 

 

 

In conclusion, although infinite cannot be measured, there are sizes to it, and you can't say that 0 is bigger than 3, 64, or 1,000 only because it's infinite.

 

 

 

I am not going into the intimate details of infinite but from my understanding of it is never ending, so your saying there is a never ending list of numbers between 0 and 1? :shame:

 

 

 

There might be googolplexian or more numbers between them but you would eventually get to 1.

 

 

 

I think of it like and FPS, if you have infinite ammo, there isn't an enormous amount of it, there is no limit.

[/hide]

 

 

 

Of course there are infinite numbers between 1 and 0. You can add as many numbers after the dot, and will still not get 1, as long as before the dot there is a 0.

 

 

 

examples:

 

0.1

 

0.000000000000000000000000000006

 

0.1567863542135498756423545778995461

 

0.09

 

0.0000000000000000000500000000000000000000000000000001

 

 

 

These are not even close to the length these numbers can get to. Haven't you ever been to school? It's pretty much basic stuff...

 

 

 

Do you not know what googolplexian is? cos I pretty much said exactly what you just said except, I think that if you counted these numbers for millennia then you would eventually get to 1 from 0, which to me means it isn't infinite.

 

 

 

You're totaly, 100% wrong. No matter for how long you count, whether it be a year, 50 years, or over 9999999999999999999 years, you will never, EVER count all of the numbers between 1-2, simply because those are infinite.

 

 

 

You wouldn't even know where to start counting, simply because even the "smallest" number after 1, or the "biggest" before 2, is unlimited.

 

 

 

Now let's try to find the smallest number after 1 (an impossible task):

 

 

 

1.1 - difinately not.

 

1.01?

 

1.000000000000000000000000000000001?

 

1.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001?

 

 

 

We can go for ever with this, you can always add 1 more digit before the "1" at the end, there is not restrict to it.

 

 

 

This is the simplest explanation I could think of, I hope it's satisfying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would be easy to find out if we only knew luciencs combat -.- simply add his combat level to the combat that you would get from the stone of jas, 255 in every skill. and you would get the minimum combat for a god. maby max if he ovverthrows zammy.

 

 

 

also considering that guthix needed the stone of jas's power, the measly extra 300 or so levels, they couldn't really be over 1000 as people keep saying.

 

 

 

finding the combat levels for jas and the elders however... what would the combat level of someone who can afford to waste 300 levels on creating an object that really has no purpose except to be used by other god wanna be's be??

 

Lucien is lvl. 14 and has 1 hp actually and lives next door to g.e., just see for yourself.

 

 

 

He wasn't a god then and he presumably still isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess:

 

 

 

?-1/0

[hide=A funny conversation]Me:Have u wondered how my brassard, which leaves my chest bare, give about the same def as ur pile of rocks?

Friend:Hahaha

Friend:Maybe you are just good at blocking with your shoulder?

Me:Ahahahahaha[/hide]Rare drops: 4 D legs, 1 D skirt

Barrows items: 2 Verac's helms, 1 Dhorak's Greataxe, 1 Dhorak's platelegs, 2 Karil's leathertops, 1 Karil's crossbow, 1 Guthan's chainskirt

 

Quest cape achieved 28 Dec, 2009, lost with Nomad's Requiem, re-obtained on 19 Mar 2010.

 

Fire cape achieved 1 Nov 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess:

 

 

 

?-1/0

 

The square root of negative numbers does not exist unless we find a third and possibly fourth set of numbers, so it'll be like:

 

 

 

+3 * +3 = +9 ? 3

 

-3 * -3 = +9 ? 3

 

-------------------

 

+?3 * +?3 = -9 ? ?3

 

-?3 * -?3 = -9 ? ?3

 

 

 

Wait a minute maybe I just made a groundbreaking discovery within math... :-k

 

I'll be rich and famous, YAY!!!

 

-Or maybe not.

FaladorTavern-2.png

TheMather1.jpg

Twitter:

@TheMather1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

then the corp beast could nearly kill them :oops:

 

 

 

2048 i would guess

 

Well. they can't defend against the corporeal beast's attacks but then again i cannot kill a vyrewatch with godswords.

 

 

 

well at least they have an almost believable reason

 

*you are about to swing gs*

 

*vyrewatch fly's up a foot out of your reach*

 

player: ffffffffffffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

edit #2. try typing fly's without the '

 

 

 

That's not the real reason, they have mind reading skills and they can predict where are you going to attack them, then they'll avoid, with a flail you don't even know where is it gonna hit so that's the way to kill them, they tried using a verac's flail on them but it didn't work because it wasn't made of silver. So that's the reason of the Ivandis Flail ;P (They're not immune, they just know where you were going to attack so you needed an unpredictable weapon).

 

 

 

On Topic

 

I highly doubt we would fight them, if we did they would die, and paradox to RuneScape and possibly another God Wars (As the Edicts of Guthix Say: Saradomin and Zamorak were the only ones admitted to stay after the God Wars because they created balance, the good of Saradomin with the evil of Zamorak, if any of these tried to invade the other it would create an unbalance and possibly another God Wars due to the one loosing calling up on reinforcements from other planes, and Guthix would wake up once more and destroy RuneScape, he banned all the gods after the God Wars, but only left Saradomin and Zamorak due to their balancing nature with each other).

 

 

 

But if in case we were to fight them, say keeping the balance (Not actually killing them but making them faint or something) I think 1000+ Would do.

 

 

 

 

 

To The Mather:

 

You forgot he also divided by 0 :twss:

_p3_minato_arisato_signature__by_x0sandylicious0x-d3hnk6v.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.