>
> Note that there is some dispute in the mathematical world over how big
> c is. Some suggest that it is a rather small infinite cardinal, possibly
> aleph-one, meaning the second smallest one (just above aleph-zero,
> which is the cardinality of the integers). Others suggest that it may
> be larger, possibly much larger, bigger than aleph-(aleph-zero).
>
> Hal
For philosophical reasons it would be nice for the MW to be of cardinality
omega, larger than all of Cantor's infinities. If the MW is also a continuum,
then the continuum may be of size omega. Does it make any sense?
George
attached mail follows:
>
> Note that there is some dispute in the mathematical world over how big
> c is. Some suggest that it is a rather small infinite cardinal, possibly
> aleph-one, meaning the second smallest one (just above aleph-zero,
> which is the cardinality of the integers). Others suggest that it may
> be larger, possibly much larger, bigger than aleph-(aleph-zero).
>
> Hal
>
>
My memory is fading somewhat about transfinite cardinal
numbers. However, it seems to me that c \leq \aleph_1. \aleph_1 is the
cardinality of the set of all sets of cardinalilty \leq\aleph_0. Since c
is the cardinality of the set of all subsets of N, which is a subset
of the set of all sets of cardinality \leq\aleph_0.
What has never been proven is that c=\aleph_1, although it is widely
suspected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Russell Standish Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit,
University of NSW Phone 9385 6967
Sydney 2052 Fax 9385 7123
Australia R.Standish.domain.name.hidden
Room 2075, Red Centre
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tue Jul 13 1999 - 21:41:46 PDT