:vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote: :vote:

  • silent_water [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    the mathematical answer is that the same number of people die on both tracks. notice how the first track constructs a way to enumerate a set of people. the same enumeration can then be applied to the second set, because you're doing the exact same thing. the property that makes the reals dense and uncountable is precisely that it is impossible to assign one discrete element of an enumerable set to each real. "each real number" as a phrase doesn't make sense mathematically - the real numbers are the continuum.

    it's a very similar reasoning error as the one that leads people to think that an infinite stack of $20 bills must be worth more than an infinite stack of $1 bills.

    this is the joke in the OP - it doesn't matter whether you pull the lever or not, a false choice - and I've now thoroughly ruined it.

      • silent_water [she/her]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I didn't say it was? I'm comparing the sizes of sets by noticing the enumeration of the first set and that same enumeration applies to the second set.

          • silent_water [she/her]
            ·
            1 year ago

            no, emphatically:

            1. an infinite set is countable if there is a one to one mapping between it and the natural numbers. this is easy with the first set as you can literally count off, 1, 2, 3, etc..
            2. the second set is countable in exactly the same way.

            this is extremely basic set theory. you're deeply misinformed.

              • silent_water [she/her]
                ·
                1 year ago

                no shit. I'm saying you can't use an enumerable set to produce a mapping with the reals. the natural numbers are an infinite set yet are definitionally countable as they are the ordinals.

                disengage, you're arguing nonsense with someone with a literal degree in mathematics.

                  • ella [any]MA
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Respect people's right to disengage

                  • ella [any]MA
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Respect people’s right to disengage

                  • silent_water [she/her]
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    that's the conceit of the joke, the idea that you can use an enumerated list and map them to the reals. if you could do such a thing, you'd immediately fall prey to Cantor's diagonalization argument. the train tracks are a continuum. they can be mapped to the reals. a neverending list of people cannot.

                      • WoofWoof91 [comrade/them]
                        ·
                        1 year ago

                        The premise of the joke is incorrect because the joke thinks “infinity = infinity”.

                        i fucking hate maths

              • silent_water [she/her]
                ·
                1 year ago

                I'm pretty sure it's just a VOOOOTE joke about how there's no difference between the two parties, except aimed at math nerds.

          • replaceable [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Do you pull the lever killing one person for every integer

            Or do you do nothing, allowing the trolley to kill one person for every real number

            The meme establishes the same mapping on both infinities so both infinities have the same cardinality meaning that actually the second infinity is not continuum but aleph null

    • Llituro [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      idk i just don't think it's fun to point out that the problem is inherently poorly posed. you're of course right that you can't actually consistently assign individual people to the reals.

      i propose that we set up a third track that lets us mow down a transfinite number of innocents.