[Guest]

There is an equation that is 1+1=Infinity. Can you explain how this works?

[Guest]

cell divison

omg!!! that does make me feel stupid!!!

[Izzy]

cell divison

Elaborate. I'm not seeing the '1+1'.

[Guest]

cell divison

OHHHH!!!!

DUH! >.<

Though, you sorta led us off track with the man+woman concept....

[Guest]

Elaborate. I'm not seeing the '1+1'.

ya, what i see is 1 divided by 2 = 1

[Guest]

cell divison

That isn't right. You are implying that asexual reproduction is 1+1

the question would have to have been 1x1 = infinity

1+1 only applies to my answer which requires 2 parents - sexual reproduction.

[Guest]

ya, what i see is 1 divided by 2 = 1

(1 / 2)^infinity = infinity

[Guest]

1sperm cell + 1egg cell = an infinite groth of cells and dna material

Elaborate. I'm not seeing the '1+1'.

[Guest]

(1 / 2)^infinity = infinity

ah, that works better.

[Izzy]

No species that I am aware of has lived even 100 million years and remained the same species, but that doesn't matter. As I said, this is a scientific model, used to demonstrate potential reality, which is why it is theoretically true. It seems appropriate in this situation because biological models are never perfectly accurate in practice, plus infinity as a number does not truly exist and therefore an answer that cannot practically exist is the only way to meet the needs of th question.

Infinity is just mathematical concept, that describes a number line, no more real or false than negative numbers being the extensions of natural numbers and imaginary numbers (how poorly named) being extensions of the real number plane into the complex one. This is why I asked Zanther to define infinity, so answers to his riddle could be settled on appropriately. What I'm getting from this, mostly Zanther, is that if you have the proper organelles to create one life form, that thing can multiply itself (sexually or asexually is irrelevant) infinitely. Umm, yeah dude, not going to happen. If it works in theory but never in practice, I think the theories need to be revised so they exclude the impossible (impossible that is, not improbable) conditions and give us results that actually get us somewhere.

Edited March 18, 2009 by Izzy

[Guest]

Infinity is just mathematical concept, that describes a number line, no more real or false than negative numbers being the extensions of natural numbers and imaginary numbers (how poorly named) being extensions of the real number plane into the complex one. This is why I asked Zanther to define infinity, so answers to his riddle could be settled on appropriately. What I'm getting from this, mostly Zanther, is that if you have the proper organelles to create one life form, that thing can multiply itself (sexually or asexually is irrelevant) infinitely. Umm, yeah dude, not going to happen. If it works in theory but never in practice, I think the theories need to be revised so they exclude the impossible (impossible that is, not improbable) conditions and give us results that actually get us somewhere.

You have a very nihilistic approach to solving riddles. They are rarely possible in practice, but more often thought experiments. They don't need to be practical. Besides that, in science infinity does have a practical existence. For infinity to apply in a scientific model, it must mean that if all else remains the same, meaning no cataclysmic events in this situation, the model will continue growing. Anybody who has ever used birth control knows that 1+1 can often equal 0, but that isn't the model. For a model to work there must be certain assumptions made, in this case being that the environment that sustains life continues forever.

Also, just because we define something as a new species does not mean that it is not part of the same lineage, which is why I used that word in my clarification. All life on Earth today came from a single asexual cell division, therefore the model has already reached a level unquantifiable, effectively infinity by the scientific definition.

[Guest]

No species that I am aware of has lived even 100 million years and remained the same species, but that doesn't matter. As I said, this is a scientific model, used to demonstrate potential reality, which is why it is theoretically true. It seems appropriate in this situation because biological models are never perfectly accurate in practice, plus infinity as a number does not truly exist and therefore an answer that cannot practically exist is the only way to meet the needs of th question.

If you mean to use "truly" as a synonym for "practically", then I suppose you are right, but "truly" truly includes both the countable numbers and the reals, both of which actually exist, along with an uncountable number of higher levels of infinity, which are denoted by the Alephs. Here is an example:

The symbol א‎0 (aleph with a subscript of 0). Refers to the cardinality of a countably infinite set. They exist as abstractions, which are as real as anything we know about. Plato would have said that they are more real than anything we know!

[Guest]

I dont really agree with the answer

If 1man + 1woman doesn't work because people will eventually become extinct, the sperm and egg cant work because a person will eventually die. Of course theoretically they both work when death is not a factor.

My original thought was if 1+1 was the first two terms of an infinite series such as (n/n) + (n/n)... etc where n is an increasing integer (1, 2, 3,... infinity), then the sum of all of the terms (1/1 + 2/2 + 3/3... (infinity/infinity)) will diverge to infinity, but that's math. It kinda goes along with the cell answer though.

The first hint threw me off too because all science uses math, it may not seem like it but it does, 1+1 is math no matter how you slice it.

Oh and BTW, (1 / 2)^infinity = 0, not infinity, but (1 / 2)^(1/infinity) works

[Guest]

I dont really agree with the answer

If 1man + 1woman doesn't work because people will eventually become extinct, the sperm and egg cant work because a person will eventually die. Of course theoretically they both work when death is not a factor.

My original thought was if 1+1 was the first two terms of an infinite series such as (n/n) + (n/n)... etc where n is an increasing integer (1, 2, 3,... infinity), then the sum of all of the terms (1/1 + 2/2 + 3/3... (infinity/infinity)) will diverge to infinity, but that's math. It kinda goes along with the cell answer though.

The first hint threw me off too because all science uses math, it may not seem like it but it does, 1+1 is math no matter how you slice it.

Oh and BTW, (1 / 2)^infinity = 0, not infinity, but (1 / 2)^(1/infinity) works

I disagree with your math, because it is math. I used the (1 / 2)^infinity = infinity as a rewrite to the riddle specifically because it only works under the interpretation of 1 cell divided by 2 infinite times makes infinite cells.

[Guest]

If you mean to use "truly" as a synonym for "practically", then I suppose you are right, but "truly" truly includes both the countable numbers and the reals, both of which actually exist, along with an uncountable number of higher levels of infinity, which are denoted by the Alephs. Here is an example:

The symbol א‎0 (aleph with a subscript of 0). Refers to the cardinality of a countably infinite set. They exist as abstractions, which are as real as anything we know about. Plato would have said that they are more real than anything we know!

I am a scientist, truly means practically in my lexicon unless otherwise specified. Infinity dos not truly exist because it is unquantifiable, it is an idea.

[Guest]

If you think of (1 / 2)^infinity = infinity as one cell dividing into two cells, infinity times, it does work (again provided you never die). But if you graph out (1/2)^x (where x is increasing), the graph slopes down to zero, that's what I meant.

[Guest]

hahahaha nice one...i take this as a good joke than a question... ok now i have a new question / joke ...

1 = Infinity ... How is this equation possible ....? most of you will NOW be able to crack this one...

[Guest]

I also wanted to add my thoughts on the definition of infinity. The best explanation I have ever heard is infinity is a number increasing so fast and for so long you can't ever catch up with the end.

[Guest]

If you think of (1 / 2)^infinity = infinity as one cell dividing into two cells, infinity times, it does work (again provided you never die). But if you graph out (1/2)^x (where x is increasing), the graph slopes down to zero, that's what I meant.

I get it, that is why it only works whe interpreted a certain way, which is why it is a riddle. The other way it is just an equation, which would, as you so astutely pointed out, be false.

[Izzy]

You have a very nihilistic approach to solving riddles. They are rarely possible in practice, but more often thought experiments. They don't need to be practical. Besides that, in science infinity does have a practical existence. For infinity to apply in a scientific model, it must mean that if all else remains the same, meaning no cataclysmic events in this situation, the model will continue growing. Anybody who has ever used birth control knows that 1+1 can often equal 0, but that isn't the model. For a model to work there must be certain assumptions made, in this case being that the environment that sustains life continues forever.

Also, just because we define something as a new species does not mean that it is not part of the same lineage, which is why I used that word in my clarification. All life on Earth today came from a single asexual cell division, therefore the model has already reached a level unquantifiable, effectively infinity by the scientific definition.

I'm not saying don't make exceptions, but don't have this perfect universe where every cell survives and thrives, reproducing an infinite amount of perfect cells. It doesn't happen like that. The universe is still generally young, and depending on if you go with the infinite expansion or big crunch theory, I'm technically right either way? Thinking of this as I go along, 3 am, let's go gadget brain.

In the event of the big crunch, everything vanishes, and the universe ceases to exist, being nothing more that it was prior to the big bang. All particles/cells/I don't care vanish, leaving not a trace. Whatever cells did exist weren't an infinite amount, and definitely don't exist anymore. I win.

In the event of infinite expansion (as the OP's answer wasn't 'space', this shouldn't be used in his defense), particles/cells/blah are only created when energy is available for them. Since all the energy in the worlds equals out to 0, precisely, matter will constantly be transformed back into energy, and we're not getting an infinite amount of particles (lmao, wrote 'parties'), we just getting lots of space. And really dunno where I'm going with this at this point. *yawn* Sowwy. Buh yeah.

[Guest]

If Infinity is a variable that equals 1, then 1 = Infinity works!!

[Guest]

hahahaha nice one...i take this as a good joke than a question... ok now i have a new question / joke ...

1 = Infinity ... How is this equation possible ....? most of you will NOW be able to crack this one...

Is this just the asexual reproduction model?

[Guest]

I'm not saying don't make exceptions, but don't have this perfect universe where every cell survives and thrives, reproducing an infinite amount of perfect cells. It doesn't happen like that. The universe is still generally young, and depending on if you go with the infinite expansion or big crunch theory, I'm technically right either way? Thinking of this as I go along, 3 am, let's go gadget brain.

In the event of the big crunch, everything vanishes, and the universe ceases to exist, being nothing more that it was prior to the big bang. All particles/cells/I don't care vanish, leaving not a trace. Whatever cells did exist weren't an infinite amount, and definitely don't exist anymore. I win.

In the event of infinite expansion (as the OP's answer wasn't 'space', this shouldn't be used in his defense), particles/cells/blah are only created when energy is available for them. Since all the energy in the worlds equals out to 0, precisely, matter will constantly be transformed back into energy, and we're not getting an infinite amount of particles (lmao, wrote 'parties'), we just getting lots of space. And really dunno where I'm going with this at this point. *yawn* Sowwy. Buh yeah.

This is applying a very nihilistic worldview, as I said before. To demonstrate this point allow me to apply the same thought process to another riddle: which came first, the chicken or the egg. >>> It doesn't matter because they are both dead now anyway.

Bad example, just poking fun there, but what I am getting at is that infinity has a different meaning when you talk about scientific models than it does in the real world. In the real world, infinity doesn't exist and eventually everything will come to an end. A scientific model works under the assumption that everything not specified within it stays the same.

one final equation for you

me = correct

[Izzy]

This is applying a very nihilistic worldview, as I said before. To demonstrate this point allow me to apply the same thought process to another riddle: which came first, the chicken or the egg. >>> It doesn't matter because they are both dead now anyway.

Bad example, just poking fun there, but what I am getting at is that infinity has a different meaning when you talk about scientific models than it does in the real world. In the real world, infinity doesn't exist and eventually everything will come to an end. A scientific model works under the assumption that everything not specified within it stays the same.

one final equation for you

me = correct

Yeah, I'm existential nihilist (metaphysical nihilists annoy the hell outta me, just so you know) and atheist. I'd insert a thumbs-up smiley here if this board had one. Egg came first. Chicken evolved from something else and hatched from that egg.

And as I said before, science experiments should be done under real-life circumstances, because we're observing the natural world, not a wonderful artificial one.

Recalculate. <_<

[Guest]

Yeah, I'm existential nihilist (metaphysical nihilists annoy the hell outta me, just so you know) and atheist. I'd insert a thumbs-up smiley here if this board had one. Egg came first. Chicken evolved from something else and hatched from that egg.

And as I said before, science experiments should be done under real-life circumstances, because we're observing the natural world, not a wonderful artificial one.

Recalculate. <_<

too right you are, amniote eggs were around far longer than chickens.

You are talking about experiments, which are different from models. Experiments are used to create models, which explain the essential concepts behind the outcomes of the experiments or observations. For example, the acceleration of gravity on Earth is modeled at 9.8m/s/s. Experimentally, the elevation, location on Earth, orientation of the Earth to the moon and sun with respect to location of experiment... countless factors could effect the experimental outcome, but the model allows for a practical application of the results of the experiment. This model will also become obsolete when the Earth ceases to exist, but it will not make the model false, just no longer practical to use. The beauty of models is that they are independent of reality, they are categorical. Think in terms of animals, I have never seen a duck that glows in the dark and as far as I am aware none exist. I could however create a category for said duck so that if one ever was found, it would fit into said category. The category exists whether or not anything fits into it.

[Guest]

It's not math. It's science.

i think 1 ADAM and 1 EVE made infinity people

therefore 1 + 1 = infinity.