• Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    5 months ago

    A mathematician, a physicist and an engineer are led into a long room. At the other end stands a beautiful naked woman. “When I ring this bell,” she says" you may cross half the space between us. When I ring the bell again, you may again cross half the space between us." Both the mathematician and physicist groan and wander off. “Ah, it’s Zeno’s paradox, we can never actually reach her.” The engineer, waiting for the bell, says “I think I can get close enough.”

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              yeah but like, you don’t need to specify that one individual is naked. If that’s a required factoid of the statement, the engineer, mathematician, and physicist should also be naked. But there’s no mention of that.

              Now i don’t have much experience in relationships, particularly inter personal ones, but to my knowledge, you are generally clothed most of the time.

              • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                You are overthinking it. This is just a premise to setup the joke that an engineer deals with approximation while the other two give up because they’ll never reach 0.

                It could be a bowl of ice cream for all that matters, but people like corny jokes, so that’s it.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  no i understood that part. Unless the naked woman has something to do with that part of the joke itself, then i don’t know why it’s mentioned.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              19
              ·
              5 months ago

              no i just don’t fucking understand why the naked woman matters here.

              Could be fucking anything, a pile of a billion dollars. Three turtles, or a goat, it’s the same joke.

              • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I don’t think it’s the same joke when it’s three turtles or a goat, because the joke is “I think I can get close enough…to engage in unspecified sex acts with this woman.”

                You think the same chemicals that turned the frickin frogs gay is responsible for this aversion to sexual thoughts? “Could it not be a naked woman? That clutches my pearls.”

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  17
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  “I think I can get close enough…to engage in unspecified sex acts with this woman.”

                  that’s what i would assume, but then again it never states anything, so this is like walking into a fucking storage shed and seeing a colonoscopy going on. It’s just fucking weird.

              • RoosterBoy@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Exactly, it’s the same joke regardless so why get bent out of shape over it?

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  i mean yeah, i guess so, but that’s not what im confused over.

                  I just want to know why specifically it was written with a nude woman? It never alluded to anything in particular.

      • echolalia@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        23
        ·
        5 months ago

        Only straight men are mathematicians, physicists and engineers. This is why the joke is framed this way.

        See: responses from OP, valiantly defending his choice to “piss people off”, instead of noticing the joke is just yet another reminder that men are default.

        After all, sexism is over, and STEM isn’t hostile to women/non-heteronormative people. It’s all in our head.

        • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Hi there friend, I am here to inform you that many woman also like the titty. Gay girls exist my friend, and the gender of the three professionals is never specified.

          I’ll assume ya ain’t trying to be homophobic my buddy but I hope you keep that in mind for future refference.

          Edit racism comment was another guy, sorry, very tired

          • echolalia@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’m not going to spend much time engaging with your comment because you didn’t read mine well.

            I did not mention race.

            I included mention of gay folks (see non-heteronormative). The “joke” doesn’t work unless the stem major desires being very close to a naked woman, so I don’t find your mention of gay men to make sense.

            • loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              You did a racism. You did an imperialism. You did a nationalism. You did a xenophobia. You did a white fragility. You did a weak apology. You did no growth. This makes it abundantly clear you don’t understand the intersectional nature of the multiplicity of your offenses

              /s

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          that’s the vibe i’m getting, but it’s a really fucking weird premise for a hypothetical regardless.

          “there are a fisher, a farmer, and a welder in a bar, on the other side is cthulhu” is basically how it’s worded

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          5 months ago

          When taking about limits, you can approach 0 from the positive or negative direction, which can give very different results. For example, lim cotx, x->0+ = ∞ while lim cotx, x->0- = -∞

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          IEEE 754

          I mean it’s an algebra, isn’t it? And it definitely was mathematicians who came up with the thing. In the same way that artists didn’t come up with the CGI colour palette.

          • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            I’m not familiar with IEEE 754.

            Edit: I think this sort of space shouldn’t be the kind where people get downvoted for admitting ignorance honestly, but maybe that’s just me.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              It’s a wonderful world where 1 / 0 is ∞ and 1 / -0 is -∞, making a lot of high school teachers very very mad. OTOH it’s also a very strange world where x = y does not imply 1 / x = 1 / y. But it is, very emphatically, an algebra.

              Mostly it’s pure numerology, at least from the POV of most of the people using it.

            • Gobbel2000@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              IEEE 754 is the standard to which basically all computer systems implement floating point numbers. It specifically distinguishes between +0 and -0 among other weird quirks.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              You probably are familiar with the thing, just not under that name, and not as a subject of mathematical study. I am aware that there are, at least in theory, mathematicians never expanding beyond pen+paper (and that’s fine) but TBH they’re getting kinda rare. The last time you fired up Julia you probably used them, R, possibly, Coq, it’d actually be a surprise.

              They’re most widely known to trip up newbie programmers, causing excessive bug hunts and then a proud bug report stating “0.1 + 0.2 /= 0.3, that’s wrong”, to which the reply will be “nope, that’s exactly as the spec says”. The solution, to people who aren’t numerologists, is to sprinkle gratuitous amounts of epsilons everywhere.

          • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            I’m aware. Algebra is what I’m most interested in, and so when someone says “0” I think “additive identity of a ring” unless context makes the use obvious.

            Edit: I’ve given it some thought, and I’m not convinced all algebras can fit in a set, because every non-empty set can have at least one algebra imposed upon them, and so the set of all algebras must have cardinality no less than the proper class of all sets. We also can’t have a set of all algebras (up to isomorphism) because iirc the surreal numbers are an algebra imposed on a structure that itself incorporates a proper class, and is thus incapable of being a set element.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Depends, I’d say. Is your set theory incomplete or inconsistent?

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      And, as a mathematician who has been coding a library to create scaled geometric graphics for his paper, I hate -0.0.

      Seriously, I run every number where sign determines action through a function I call “fix_zero” just because tiny tiny rounding errors pile up in floats, even is numpy.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    i mean, mathematically speaking, every number that isn’t zero, is further away from zero, than the number before it.

    So there is a point to the statement of “approaching zero” as well “near zero” and “about zero” since 100 probably isn’t about zero.

    Also CS nerds would like to fight you about floating point values.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 months ago

    lets ignore the higher order terms for now. five lines below look at this beautiful exact equality that we got