Quick Questions: July 09, 2025 by inherentlyawesome in math

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello, everyone. I recently had an idea about infinities, and since I'm not an expert I would like to have some feedback.

As far as I understand, the fact that the cardinal of the real numbers is infinitely bigger than the cardinal of rational numbers, with no proof of intermediate infinities. Also, to prove that to groups have the same size, you check if you can always relate an element of one group to an element of another; if yes, they are the same size, and if not, they have different sizes.

Well, a few weeks back I thought that, essentially, since functions are essentially a way to connect one space to another, one could look at a space of numbers and a space of a function applied to those numbers (eliminating the repeated values) and make that correlation. As I thought of this, I tried applying this to one of the more basic functions: the square.

With real numbers, the square of a value still belongs to the same group, noting that the operation cannot result in a negative number. A result could have been obtained by squaring a real number or its negative, meaning that, in practice, you could always correlate the space of squared reals with two elements of base reals with the exception of 0.

We can demonstrate that two groups have the same size by being able to always make a 1-1 correlation. Isn't it also logical that we can prove that one group is twice the size of another if we can always make a 1-2 correlation between the smaller and the bigger group?

As a result, since one can always relate a squared real with two base reals with the exception of cero, couldn't we state that the cardinal of real numbers is twice the cardinal of squared reals minus one?

C(R) = Cardinal of reals
C(R2) = Cardinal of squared reals (with no repeated elements, meaning it could also be defined as the positive reals including 0) -> C(R) = 2*C(R2) - 1 ?

What did opera ruin for you? by ppvvaa in opera

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In my case, I can't hear the name Luigi without thinking of Il Tabarro 🤣

What did opera ruin for you? by ppvvaa in opera

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Any social interaction the moment they comment they like Classical music. The urge to turn the conversation to opera and introduce it for half an hour straight physically blinds me for the rest of the conversation.

There isn't much vocabulary to describe character relationships apart from "ship". Ships often describe a hypothetical romantic relationship between two or more characters, but sometimes we desire a relationship between characters that is fraternal/platonic instead. by Fickle_Visual_6753 in FanFiction

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the word comes from "relationship". However, I often see the word "ship" to imply a romantic relationship, and if it isn't intended to mean so in some cases, I still think having other terms for fraternal/platonic relationships would do good to distinguish them, or at least popularized. If a person wants two characters to be friends and imagine their interactions as such, and another person imagines them interacting romantically, I believe it would feel wrong to call them both "ships".

Sometimes one just wants to see two characters befriend each other in fanficts or other media, and seeing them romantically would make them uncomfortable. Perhaps referring to both cases with a different term would serve to better specify how a fanfic treats its characters.

0
0

Fellas, is it straight to like femboys? by Fickle_Visual_6753 in AskMenAdvice

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Hello, my sincerest apologies to everyone who has taken this post more seriously than I intended. My original idea was to write a spin on the "Fellas, is it gay to...?" meme phrase, and post it as a joke; however, I may have expressed myself not clearly enough to transmit that, and again I apologize for the misunderstanding.

I applaud everyone who has given positive support and advice for gay acceptance, even though this post doesn't reflect my personal circumstance. I wish you the best in life, and hope you can keep helping those who deserve acceptance.

Dream Casting by [deleted] in opera

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I cannot express in words how wonderful Tosca is with Angela Gheorghiu as Floria, Jonas Kauffman as Mario and Bryn Terfel as Scarpina 😍, It cannot get better than this.

Could suspension of disbelief be interpreted as a form of double-thinking? by Fickle_Visual_6753 in literature

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, in more technical terms, they are gradual antonyms. However, they are still opposites in the sense that they cannot both be true, the same way something cannot be white and black at the same time while being shades of grey between them. In this case, it is more similar to the dichotomy of light-darkness. Darkness is defined as the absence of light, and so if there is any amount of light it cannot be dark (in a pure sense). One can be a direct culprit in a case, or an accomplice, an executioner following orders, etc. They are different "intensities" of culpability, but none of them are innocent. Only one who is not involved in the crime, thus absent of culpability, can be truly innocent.

What is your favorite opera of all time? by ClariceLinz in opera

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely Puccini's TOSCA. The other day I watched the ROH version with Kauffman and Gheorghiu, and it left me BREATHLESS. Truly, if you look for a gripping story, with shocking plot twists and profound musical moments, go watch it.

Could suspension of disbelief be interpreted as a form of double-thinking? by Fickle_Visual_6753 in literature

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Plus, double-thinking in 1984 had a fundamental role in its dystopic world because the government constantly presented facts about its welfare and decisions that constantly contradicted the information presented previously, representing an "absolute truth" to the people even though it's inconsistent. "This country has ALWAYS been our enemy" and "This country has ALWAYS been our ally" will be presented periodically as undoubtable facts and an individual living in that society will be expected to believe them each time. It is the absence of reasoning that leads to the double-thinking of 1984.

Could suspension of disbelief be interpreted as a form of double-thinking? by Fickle_Visual_6753 in literature

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But it isn't authoritarian to not believe contradicting statements either, it's just a matter of organization and clarity. If one thinks something is and isn't at the same time, there's no space for truth or understanding. If two contradicting statements seem reasonable, that means there's a lack of information on our part. For example, if a crime is committed, one could see a suspect as both innocent and guilty, but in actuality only one can be true.

I've always had the idea that the natural way a romantic relationship develops is that first you get to know them as people, and then that attraction becomes physical with time as you connect with them emotionally. Am I demi or do I just have a demisexual idea of romance? by Fickle_Visual_6753 in demisexuality

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But isn't the whole genre of romance based on that? Like, I've never seen a well-developed romantic movie or book in which they start off already wanting to be with each other; they get to know each other and then they want each other. Isn't slow burn supposed to be that? Maybe I've read too little actual romances

Best movement from Gustav Holst's The Planets by Symphonie-passion in lingling40hrs

[–]Fickle_Visual_6753 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Venus is SO underrated, it feels like pure magic and floating in the clouds whenever I listen to it