![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 23:37:44 +0800, "riverman" wrote:
wrote in message .. . On 1 Nov 2006 16:27:51 -0800, "riverman" wrote: Whether or not _you_ can measure to _your_ satisfaction that two points on a 2-dimensional plane are _absolutely_ the same distance from an initially-chosen point (in this case, a "target"_), those two points certainly exist. Yes, they do. The random selection of a second point (the landing of Dart A) "x" distance from the first point (the "target") creates a radius from which a circumference may be scribed. The second dart (Dart B) and its landing point have no relevance and can be ignored. Not necessarily, it depends on what is being asked. "Conditional probabilities" do exist. But in the case of what you are discussing (the existance of arcs), I concur; we can ignore the second dart for now. Well, I guess it's good that at least some of the time, you don't argue with yourself... A third dart is thrown (Dart C). According to your theory, that dart can easily and readily strike any point on the disk or any point outside of the circumference created by the selection of the first and second points, up to and including "un-measurably" close to the inside or the outside of the circumference, but can never actually strike a point on the circumference. IOW, the third point (Dart C) can only create a second radius that must be less than or greater than the first radius. Yes, that's correct also. There is a statement in calculus that asserts that no matter what two numbers you choose on the number line, there is always another number between them. No matter how close to the circumference you get, you can always get closer. But you cannot get there unless you, well, get there. Oh, geez...if there's a statement and all...well, anyone thinking about math better cut it out...just think of all the books that'll need to be changed if someone ****s up and comes up with something new... With not being able to select a second point on the circumference, arcs, in such a world, don't exist. No one said you cannot select a second point. What is being said is that the probability of another dart hitting that point, or any other point on that circle, is zero. Thats because the point is infinitely small. The probability of hitting something infinitely small is infinitely small....zero, in fact. Infinitely small is not "zero." One can choose to "round it off" and just call it "zero," but it isn't, in fact, non-existent. Here's another hint: consider the points in a tangent to point/Dart A and the points in lines perpendicular to that tangent and...why, shoot, sooner or later, one might account for all the points in the plane, and then, uh-oh... HTH, R |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|