• LapGoat@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 minutes ago

    if you were to pick randomly, the correct answer would change something you didnt pick.

    meaning the chances of a random selection picking the correct answer is zero.

    since your answer is not a random selection, you can input the answer as C.

  • the_wizard_of_0Z@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Math with no rules is a pattern. Math with rules is useful. Bouncing back and forth might refine the process?

  • the_wizard_of_0Z@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Mathmatical riddles. Kinda like turds that taste like skittles. News flash the people in charge don’t know what they are doing.

  • theham@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    The question really is… are all questions really worth solving and what good is math if you are not solving problems. Self awarness is the pursuit of understanding the world we live in and math is a tool to do just that. Maybe the output is just misunderstood… maybe there is no answer to some problems. The answer is 2

  • theham@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    FINE! Post modernism in the chat like bla bla bla but greed is good and we were born in its shaddow. The answer is 100%

  • theham@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Truth is a popularity contest created in a poorly written language. Garbage in garbage out. The answer is 666,666,666 X 10^(3000/3) or all the above

    • the_wizard_of_0Z@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      🤔… with poorly written rules it might seem proper to just make up sum shit and your color outside the lines moment might just be the one. Yet IRL rockets explode dams just burst…thermal run away yada yada soooo

  • xylogx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    Godel showed that self-referential problems like this are impossible to resolve. He proved that the existence of these types of problems mean that math can never completely describe reality as outlined in his incompleteness theorems -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel’s_incompleteness_theorems

    This is one of the drivers of post-modernist thinking. Douglas Hofstadter talks a lot about this and the nature of consciousness in his famous book Gödel, Escher, Bach -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel%2C_Escher%2C_Bach

    • iltg@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      as far as i understand, godel’s incompleteness doesn’t touch reality or ability for math to describe reality. math is very vast and we only need a fraction of it to describe reality right now. whether this description is correct is debatable but not part of godel’s proof, which to me only means math can’t be “summarized” into a set of “universal” rules. i may be wrong tho, godel’s work is a lot to take in

      • xylogx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Yes, I described it badly and that description is inaccurate. It is technically about completeness which has a very specific definition. The implication that no formal logic system could describe even itself fully and that was a major blow to modernist “clock-maker’s universe” view of the reality.