• Codex@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    6 months ago

    I take the square root of the negative trolley, then use my imaginary streetcar to establish a complex track so I can start killing in an additional dimension.

  • SpicyAnt@mander.xyzEnglish
    1·
    6 months ago

    I pull the lever and invoke Zeno’s paradox to ensure the trolley’s position remains < 1 for eternity.

    • EunieIsTheBus@feddit.deEnglish
      1·
      5 months ago

      Was this an honest question? Because the answer is ‘no’. You can’t space them out or else the set of people on the lower track would be countable which is a smaller infinity than the ones of the real numbers.

      To space them, you would have to take people of the track. Infinitely many. To be precise not all of them but as many as there are on the track.

      • knapjack@bonk.cozysumo.space
        1·
        5 months ago

        @EunieIsTheBus @science_memes It was half joke, half paradox. 😁

        If you kill two sets at the same rate, but one set is smaller, is it less bad?

        The set with one person for every real number, they’re neither spaced nor adjacent. It’s kind of a Zeno’s paradox scenario: no person can ever be first, next, or last. So I think if we can set the rate of killing the same, I’ll choose the real numbers track in hopes that the trolley can’t ever begin. If we set the rate at speed down the track, it’s gotta be the integers.

  • SasquatchBanana@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    I have a tangential question I have been wanted an explanation for:

    If there are infinite universes, would there be infinite earth’s?

    I remember (an) answer is infinite universes doesn’t necessarily mean infinite earth’s. A cool analogy of a CD rack was used when I read it, but I can’t find it. Does anyone else have an explanation and/or analogy for this?

  • repungnant_canary@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    I actually would like to choose the track where the number of people increases by one (so 1, 2, 3, 4…) and then the train will kill -1/12 people

    PS Yes, I know this sum result is problematic, it’s only a joke

  • Aceticon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    As an Engineer with a Physics background I say the most ethical choice is the real numbers side as the tram, having no room to accelerate between victims, will quickly stop, whilst it’s more likely it can keep going for ever on the integer branch of the line.

    A more effective vehicle for this would be a tank or maybe a steamroller.

    (Note to self: keep this in mind if I ever become an Evil Overlord and need to execute large numbers of people in a gruesome manner)

  • ⸻ Ban DHMO 🇦🇺 ⸻@aussie.zoneEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    This is a complex problem, hence I pull an imaginary lever and divert the trolley onto the imaginary number line to kill infinite imaginary people. No one cares because they’re imaginary

  • humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    I’ll do nothing. Either way those people will eventually die - because of the train or because of starvation and dehydration. I would prefer the train.

  • s_s@lemmy.oneEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    Infinity people always die. Even if you don’t make a decision.

          • Cringe2793@lemmy.worldEnglish
            01·
            6 months ago

            There are infinite numbers between 1 and 2, none of which are 3.

            If there are infinite numbers, then there’s 3 in there somewhere. If 3 is not there then it’s not infinite.

            • myslsl@lemmy.worldEnglish
              01·
              6 months ago

              Oh okay.

              If there are infinite numbers, then there’s 3 in there somewhere.

              No, this is not true. Just because you have infinitely many numbers in some collection, doesn’t mean one of the numbers in your collection has to be 3.

              Look at the number line. There are infinitely many numbers on the number line between 1 and 2. For example 1+1/2, 1+1/4, 1+1/8, … are in there (among many others). But all of the numbers between 1 and 2 are strictly smaller than 3, so none of them can be 3.

              Alternatively, there are infinitely many numbers strictly smaller than 3, none of which are 3 either.

              If 3 is not there then it’s not infinite.

              Well consider the set of numbers 3+1, 3+2, 3+3, 3+4, … (the set of integer numbers strictly larger than 3). This set of numbers is also infinite and does not contain 3. So a set being infinite doesn’t imply it must contain the number 3.