Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Qmarx]

On the .999r=1 thing.  I always thought the confusion arose because 1/3 of one equals .333r.  So .333r+.333r+.333r should equal 1, but it actually equals .999r.  I'm not a mathematician, so I don't know if that means .999r=1 or what.

You have the gist of it.  1 = 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = .333... + .333... + .333... = .999...

More precisely, you have .999... = the sum as n goes from 1 to infinity of 9*10^-n = 9* the sum as n goes from 1 to infinity of 10^-n.  That sum is a power series with a ratio of 1/10 and a starting point of 1/10.  It converges because 1/10 < 1, and so it converges to a/(1-r) = (1/10)/(1-1/10) = (1/10)/(9/10) = 1/9.
Returning to the original statement, .999... = 9 * (1/9) = 9/9 = 1.
It's kind of weird, but rational numbers have two ways of being written.  If it helps, you could think of writing 1 instead as writing 1.000...0001 with an infinite number of zeroes between the 1. and the 1.  So, rational numbers are essentially defined to be the limit from above and the limit from below of those two decimal expansions.

Depends if you use math with infinitesimals or not.  Nonstandard analysis is fun and easy.

Kobolds are atheists.

I thought they had objects of worship as well?  I seem to recall some kobold-named deities.

Of course, kobolds are sort of a half finished special case anyway...

[Mikademus]

Remember: This is a thread about suggesting stuff to DF. Not about arguing over axioms and science. ... Oh god no, I'm starting to regret making this thread. ... I want to stress that this should stop. Please. For the love of Urist.

Common internet mistake: you don't own this thread and can't decide its contents or direction. Threads take on their own lives, and the more interesting its topic the more tangents it will spawn (insert recursion here) until it finally ends in Godwin's Law or the Turing Tarpit.

Oh dear. ... Logic describes the rules inherent in thought.  Classical logic is governed by Aristotle's Axioms of Thought (of which, the law of non-contradiction is one). Mathematics takes more axioms and constructs a structure on top of those that is somehow useful.  Mathematics uses the laws of logic, and is therefore a part of logic.

Oh dear indeed. Mathematics shares its form and structure with logics, and doing mathematics indeed requires a logical mind. However, mathematics is not logical in that the axioms of mathematics are not logical. All attempts to axiomatise mathematics in formal logics have failed. If you wish to dispute this, please talk with gentlemen Russel, Frege, Cantor and Gödel, for a start. Thus, mathematics is not TRUE in the sense that it is not anchored in principles or axioms that are consistent (from which you can't derive false).

[Krash]

An atheist related suggestion turns into a debate over atheism, who would have known

EDIT:  How would true atheism develop in a world where gods are known (not believed) to exist (I assume this is true)?  I can see a few "god haters" or people who believe gods aren't necessary in life/don't care, but even these beliefs acknowlege the actual existance of god(s).  More likely, they'd be agnostics or something

[Align]

Kobolds are atheists.

I thought they had objects of worship as well?  I seem to recall some kobold-named deities.

Of course, kobolds are sort of a half finished special case anyway...

They worship megabeasts, if appropriate, but not gods.
But this seems like an argument against atheism in DF - no sentient creature would want to be associated with kobolds..

[Sunday]

Don't mess with kobolds, man.

Upon thinking about this a little more, perhaps you could have a set of religious. . .ummm. . .categories (I'm talking monotheism, atheism, etc.) and a set of philosophical principles.  Then you could mix and match the two.  So you'd get dwarves in a monotheistic religion that have certain pythagorist elements.  Or perhaps individual dwarves that follow a certain religion would have differing philosophies.  That would also allow for conflict between dwarves even if they're of the same religion.

This would allow for atheist rationalists, atheist humanists (or perhaps dwarfists) as well as animist existentialists or nihilists.

[G-Flex]

An atheist related suggestion turns into a debate over atheism, who would have known

EDIT:  How would true atheism develop in a world where gods are known (not believed) to exist (I assume this is true)?  I can see a few "god haters" or people who believe gods aren't necessary in life/don't care, but even these beliefs acknowlege the actual existance of god(s).  More likely, they'd be agnostics or something

How can you be agnostic if you know gods exist?

[Krash]

An atheist related suggestion turns into a debate over atheism, who would have known

EDIT:  How would true atheism develop in a world where gods are known (not believed) to exist (I assume this is true)?  I can see a few "god haters" or people who believe gods aren't necessary in life/don't care, but even these beliefs acknowlege the actual existance of god(s).  More likely, they'd be agnostics or something

How can you be agnostic if you know gods exist?

So much for me actually knowing what agnostic means.   I was looking for something more in the vein of "knows about existance of gods, doesnt care/hates them/whatever"

[Guy Montag]

Just give dwarves the entry for their religious preferences to be "Doesn't really care about the Gods" or "Disdains worship/religon"

I always figured the Dwarves that only weakly worshipped the God of Lakes or the God of Courage, ect were representive of non-religious people anyways.

It does seem kinda stupid to be an "atheist" in the DF world where gods and devils are obviously real and very powerful.

[penguinofhonor]

The thing is, Gods are not obviously real and powerful, and we don't know if they will be. Currently, you can pray to them and, like in real life, they don't do anything.

[Servant Corps]

Okay, hm. Is there support for randomly generated philosphical movements in DF, that would operate similar to religions?

[Neonivek]

The thing is, Gods are not obviously real and powerful, and we don't know if they will be. Currently, you can pray to them and, like in real life, they don't do anything.

They will eventually be obviously real and powerful. Think in the long term or read some ThreeToe stories, powergoals, or the Version 2 Arcs.

Though I also heard there may be a Adjustable Pantheon so to speak. So you could, assuming that is the dirrection it goes in, set them all to be extremely distant or non-existant.

[Skid]

So basically a setting at worldgen that determines how how powerful supernatural interaction is. Something like:

100% - Living - gods are extremely active in the world, smiting nonbelievers and causing natural disasters.

50% - Dead - most of the strongest gods have given up and wandered off to harrass a new world in the middle stages of this one's history, they are still heavily worshipped through out the land due to the obvious scorch marks they left behind.

0% - Forgotten - gods appeared briefly to create the world then left, only a few cults believe they ever existed, atheism is the norm.

[Fieari]

The thing that excites me the most about what's coming up is that while there will be real deities and supernatual forces, the game will ALSO include charletans and fakers, and religions with no basis in reality.  And even in the real religions, there will be those twisting it to their own ends, adding heresies (that can be proven wrong by asking the real deity in question, yet people will believe anyway) and in general creating a good mess of history and politics.

Fun!

And with that, all IRL atheists playing the game could likely set their game so that there are no real deities, and yet religions will still exist to start wars and fleece the sheep.  And IRL theists can set the game so that they can fight for the purity of their religion.  Or, since it's a game, you can do whatever you think is more fun.

[Chutney]

Atheism is impossible in a world where gods do exist. You can have people that worship no one, but that's not Atheism, because gods do exist (not believing in them would be like not believing in water). The game already does this, as far as I can tell (check history, not everyone will have a "Worships X" under their "related figures" section).

Although "Urist McPeasant disdains people who worship deities" would be a FUN line in the personality description. If too many worshipers come into your fortress, he goes berserk! Of course, that would lead to most players getting rid of dwarves with that kind of personality, because it would cause too many problems (it'd be like keeping female cats instead of male cats :<) and that leads Dwarf Fortress into "Kill the Atheist before he causes problems" which, of course, really is a bad direction to go in.
I think we need to wait until Toady makes personalities and interactions between dwarves a little more complex before we make religious stuff too complicated. For now, just the ability to not have a "Worships..." in their description/legends file is find (which again, I'm pretty sure this is already possible)

[assimilateur]

If too many worshipers come into your fortress, he goes berserk!

Exactly. Just like in real life, where nonbelievers are prone to violent action vs believers.

Oh wait, I forgot. It was actually the other way around...