Hmm, the more I think about your blog posting, the more true it seems. The only way 2+2=4, is in the abstract world of arithmetic, (and by extension, in financial accounting).

Two apples and two more apples, will not equal 4 apples, as each apple is very different from the next. Even two precisely engineered ball-bearings, will not equal the sum of two other precisely-engineered ball-bearings, due to differences at the nano-level.

To take the argument even further, would two hydrogen molecules = two other hydrogen molecules, to make 4 identical molecules?

Would two electrons and two more electrons = 4 electrons? etc etc

I would much rather be arguing on the side of " 2+2 DOES NOT = 4 " than to challenge yourself and Prof.Penrose, Jim.

or should I say ...



In a programmed reality (some would call non-locality) nothing can exist objectively. So, I can only resort to "taunting" you like the frenchies.

"Run Away!"

For those of you on this forum who may not get the Monty Python, the "taunting" by the Frenchies of course is about the quest for the Holy Grail. I just figured the "not equals" needed some of a programmer's perspective.

A whole new meaning to the Knights who say "&ne"

2+2=4 .

reality is what we agree upon . period.
im convinced that reality is the strangest thing ever , but if am to agree on this program theory , i would have to say it is various programs nested one in the other .

Recall, this thread is still about this issue of whether 2 + 2 = 4

I told you that the symbol in html for "not equal to" is still "≠" Can anyone disagree with that?

from one of the old nonvirtual Knights who say &ne

Semantics, rule sets, proofs. Rather large subjects, don't you think? How many volumes have been dedicated to these issues and how many mathematicians have ended up in mental wards after decades of work on the problems? And you want a forum thread to address this?

Ha! Nice hearty belly laugh! Ha!

The "Un-paradox" Revisited

2 + 2 always equals 4, subjectively
In a programmed reality, objectively 2 + 2 does not exist and reason will collapse.

Its like the following examples of the "un-paradox" where you cannot substitute causal interpretation for reasoned analysis.

1. Recall the corny anecdote: Three men wish to rent a single room for one Tuesday night. The cost of the room is $30. Each man only has a $10 bill so they each give it to the desk clerk. Upon sending the gentlemen up to the room the desk clerk notices that on Tuesday's there is a special and the room was only supposed to cost $25. The desk clerk quickly hands five $1 bills to the bell hop and tells him to bring the men their change. The bell hop goes up to the room and attempts to give the men their $5 dollar refund. However, when the three men realize that there is no way to split the $5 evenly, one suggests that the bell hop should just give each man $1 and then keep the $2 as a tip - to which all agreed and that was that ... But meanwhile one of the men began doing the math in his head. He said, "Now gents: each of us gave the man $9. Correct?
"Yes." They all agreed.
"3 time $9 equals what?" He asked.
They all said, "that's easy. $27.
Then the man said, "now we gave the bell hop $2 as a tip, right?"
"Yes." Again, they all agreed.
Now if we paid $27 and gave the bell hop $2 as a tip, that is only $29. Where's the other dollar?
They all went down to the desk clerk and rehearsed the story convincing the desk clerk to pull another dollar out of the till.

2. How can one baseball player have a higher batting average in each of 2 consecutive years than another baseball player, yet when you combine the two years, the one with the lower batting average is higher than than the other?

1995
Derek Jeter 12/48 .250
David Justice 104/411 .253

1996
Derek Jeter 183/582 .314
David Justice 45/140 .321

Combined
Derek Jeter 195/630 .310
David Justice 149/551 .270

The fact that our reality is a simulation, does not detract from the fact that this reality is the one in which we exists and must navigate.

2 + 2 = 4