right, until you learn something about non-Euclidean systems.
If you don’t understand what I say, you can’t really say I’m wrong without reasonable doubt. But some scientists don’t really listen. Just like some theists who don’t want to listen to atheistic statements.
“it’s wrong to be open-minded about 2+2=4.”—right, until you learn something about non-Euclidean systems.
It seems that you are talking about many things you don’t know much about.
Non-Euclidean is a term used to refer to certain types of geometries.
In this context, do you mean non-Archimedean? That’s very different. But then 2, +,4 and = will generally have different meanings. It seems pretty damn likely that interpreting these terms in say Peano arithmetic, that 2+2=4 is true.
“it’s wrong to be open-minded about 2+2=4.”
right, until you learn something about non-Euclidean systems.
If you don’t understand what I say, you can’t really say I’m wrong without reasonable doubt. But some scientists don’t really listen. Just like some theists who don’t want to listen to atheistic statements.
I wanna learn! What’s a non-Euclidean system and what is 2+2 in it?
It seems that you are talking about many things you don’t know much about.
Non-Euclidean is a term used to refer to certain types of geometries.
In this context, do you mean non-Archimedean? That’s very different. But then 2, +,4 and = will generally have different meanings. It seems pretty damn likely that interpreting these terms in say Peano arithmetic, that 2+2=4 is true.