Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

[Denarius]

depends on the order of operations used. Meaning that saying one is true and the other false is just as valid either way. However, no matter how you solve it, one is true and one is false.

Sort of an algebraic superposition, Schrodinger's equation. Meaning that it is only both true and false at the same time as long as it is unsolved, as it can't be solved to be both at the same time.

[Hawkfeathers]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

Sure, why not?

Schrödingers-Cat-1.jpg

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

Here's how I think about it - context... are we talking about abstractions, or are we talking about real things?

If 6+4=10 and 15-5=10 then 6+4=15-5, as long as you are talking about pure abstractions (numbers) that are not tied to real-world "things."

However, as soon as those abstractions relate to "things" in the real world, 6+4 is not = 15-5, because one represents an increase, while the other represents a decrease, and an increase is not the same as a decrease.

For example, if you have $6, and you find $4 laying on the ground, you now have more money, but if you have $15, and you lose $5, you now have less money, even though in both cases you have (in the end) $10.

[DragonsFriend]

[Hawkfeathers]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

I had a boss once who proved that 1+1 does not =2. We got our new sales quotas, and they were double the previous ones. He quoted some formula they used to create the goals, using run rates, economic indicators, etc., and 45 minutes of related gobbledy-gook, and they weren't doubled, they were "adjusted". I told him he should call Harvard and tell them he has changed mathematics. The little weasel never liked me.

[anunitu]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

From the little weasel description,I imagine you were not a fan of him also...

[DragonsFriend]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

There are times when algebra doesn't work:
If A = B then A+B = 2A = 2B is correct in all situations but under the same hypothesis A/B = 1 is not correct in at least one case.

This is an example of math is not always logical. If A=0...

[Medusa]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

I can be both awake and not alert at all.

[Denarius]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

Actually, there is the argument that using an obelus instead of a solidus implies that everything before it is the numerator and everything after it is the denominator. Making it a complex fraction, which you would simplify to two.

There are other arguments as well. You'd know that if you followed my link.

[DragonsFriend]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

Actually, there is the argument that using an obelus instead of a solidus implies that everything before it is the numerator and everything after it is the denominator. Making it a complex fraction, which you would simplify to two.

There are other arguments as well. You'd know that if you followed my link.

If you had taken the time to view the note on the statement you would have found exactly what I stated. The parenthesis make that part of the operation first instead of last and division and multiplication are taken in order left to right.
There is a reason for standards.
As a hobbyist programmer I use notations like that a lot and I have to be aware of the order of operations in order to get an accurate answer. such as this:
deflexn = (velrot*pow(ranj,2)*sin(all.latitude))/(ranj/tt);

[Denarius]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

There is a reason for standards.

There are always exceptions and differing interpretations. Order_of_operations#Exceptions

What we are talking about are conventions, not hard and fast rules. There is no one universal standard.

[DragonsFriend]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

There are always exceptions and differing interpretations. Order_of_operations#Exceptions

What we are talking about are conventions, not hard and fast rules. There is no one universal standard.

You are correct which is why it is important to use some means of forcing the process that you use or intend to be used to solve the notation.
Even in language we use notation to force the understanding:
Let's eat grandma. and Let's eat, grandma. Same letters with different meanings.

[thalassa]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

Sometimes people get bogged down in minutia.

Scale is often an area where this are the are true/false become the opposite.

Familiarity often does the same thing--many times to someone with a basic knowledge or understanding, a subject seems inflexible and rule-bound...but to someone with a greater understanding it's quite bendy.

And so, it (once again) comes down to context.



The answer, Corbin, is probably what I tell people at work all the time--It depends. There are too many variables to ever give an answer without exceptions and nuances. In the real world, there is only one absolute--there are no absolutes.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

The answer, Corbin, is probably what I tell people at work all the time--It depends. There are too many variables to ever give an answer without exceptions and nuances. In the real world, there is only one absolute--there are no absolutes.

When I started reading Neitsczhe I was bothered when he said something to the effect that science does not give a accurate depiction of reality (something along those lines).

Since you know I have an amature's love of science, and nobody can seriously refute the successes of the scientific method, I didn't know what to make if it - was he gonna give me some anti-intellectual gobbledygook?

Eventually I came to understand what he was saying - context matters. That's the actual meaning of the imfamous title Beyond Good and Evil; there are no absolutes, everything depends on context. In science, theories and experiments remove variables - it's actually required, and a large part of the reason to do an experiement.

But by doing that, one creates an abstraction - something that is no longer real because in the real world their are infinite variables.

As long as the person doing the thinking remembers this, it isn't much of a problem. Scientists do drug trials and monitor long term effects, even when in vitro tests suggest that the drug is perfect because you need to test it where all the variables go back in, i.e.: the real world.

Physical science has become pretty good at this, but other "sciences," maybe not so much - political science, economic science, often the social sciences and psychology (although they are getting better) get a fail here. They are still so in love with abstract theory that they have lost touch with reality.

Context - the variables - matters.

[Raphaeline]

Re: Can a thing be both true and false at the same time?

Not precisely on topic, but I was listening to someone talk about The Fourth Way and mentioned something about true/not true vs. useful/not useful and it was something I've held on to as a way to describe my religious beliefs, which usually make me sound like an atheist in denial.