I misunderstood the same way. Yes, that is a nearly vacuous decision.
2+2=4+1-1, so if you think 2+2=4, you should feel bad for both overestimating and underestimating the value of 2+2 by 1.
-
-
-
It's not that the decision is vacuous, but that you sitting here right now do not know how you would choose. Similar to the other problems I mentioned: you can't know what it is like to know of "3^^^3" people and for your action to affect those people.
- 26 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Well actually, the preschool question of "2 + 2 = ?" is a question of reduction, not equality. The symbol = has two meanings. It is only later that it gains the meaning of the reflexive symmetric closure of the first meaning (it's already transitive).
-
2 + 2 = 4 + 1 - 1 is incorrect because the right side is not a value, but an unreduced term of type Nat.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
You should feel even worse than that! What are the odds that +1 and -1 will always cancel out, every time, down to the millionth decimal place and beyond? By thinking that 2+2=4, you are committing a mistake of infinite hubris.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Actually the total error is only sqrt(2).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Even if Omega were to give you the answer and it turns out that the Riemann hypothesis is false? At best, this is an argument for "I would probably/almost certainly pick A". And if that still bothers you, pick a conjecture for which we are more uncertain of its truth.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.