Re: Cantor's Diagonal

From: Quentin Anciaux <allcolor.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:22:30 +0100

Hi,

Le Friday 21 December 2007 13:08:38 Günther Greindl, vous avez écrit :
> Hi Russell,
>
> Russell Standish wrote:
> > In your first case, the number (1,1,1,1...) is not a natural number,
> > since it is infinite. In the second case, (0,0,0,...) is a natural
> > number, but is also on the list (at infinity).
>
> Why is (1,1,1,...) not in the list but (0,0,0,...) in the list at
> infinity? This seems very arbitrary to me.

Because zero even repeated an infinity of time is zero and is a natural
number. (1,1,1,...) can't be a natural number because it is not finite and a
natural number is finite. If it was a natural number, then N would not have a
total ordering.

> I am becoming more and more an ultra-finitist. Arguments with infinity
> seem to be very based on the assumptions you make (about platonia or
> whatever)

Finite and infinite concepts are dual concepts you can't leave one without
leaving the other.

> Regards,
> Günther


Regards,
Quentin Anciaux

-- 
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Dec 21 2007 - 07:22:43 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:14 PST