@Lady @wallhackio that is just the second option?
@wallhackio @Satsuma @Lady physics majors are like vegans; they cannot help bringing it up
@Lady i voted that 4 is bigger and i'll add that 5 is bigger than 4, but 6 is about the same as 5. (yes this is based on how high rabbits can count in roleplaying game bunnies & burrows.)
@alyssa i think 5 is bigger than 3 but 4 is about the same
@Lady that's reasonable. my actual serious opinion is ambiguous on 3 to 4. 3 is bigger than 2 and 5 is, contrary to my joke opinion, about the same as 4, but yeah, 4 vs. 3 could go either way.
@Lady Okay so it's complicated.
4 is bigger than 3 BECAUSE 4 is about the same size as 3?
Because if there are 3 things then the categories of ways they could interact are AB or BC or CA or ABC.
(= 2^3, the number of subsets, -3 because the things themselves are just, themselves, -1 since the empty set is nothing.)
Which is just 4 things, which is about the same size, as 3 so I can think of the things AND still also the ways they could interact and not be overwhelmed by it and not be able to think kf the things themselves anymore.
But you try that with 4? 2^4-4-1=12, which is SO MANY and I can't even BEGIN. There's no way I can even THINK about that really, much less think about it WHILE still thinking about the 4 things themselves.
@Lady Depends on which font you're using and how big the descender on the 3 is.
@Lady as a physicist, they are the same number because they are both order e1