Re: Kinda Miss TG...

Richard Yates wrote:


I agree with the general point of your post, although I think it was overstated and hence Richard's response(s). The case is clearer with dividing by fractions than with multiplying by them. I know that I always think of that as multiplying by the inversion of the fraction. I would be interested to read of any concrete examples that Richard can think of where dividing by a fraction is the natural way to think about a concrete operation. (I also am waiting to hear how many photons turned out to be hitting that sensor!) RY


The truth of the matter is that the truth matters little in this case. We all know how to multiply fractions. My skewed view is that this concept is only possible because we dwell in the realm of symbols. In a world without symbols we can still split an apple in half we can't split an apple through multiple additions. That concept would be alien to us.

The use of symbols may be the only super power of our species that really matters but we get fooled sometimes into thinking the symbols are reality. It's the price we pay for this wonderful power. And there's probably a wonderful irony present if you agree with the group of symbols in this post. :-)




.

Quantcast