Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Topic: A more stupid Italian mythmatician exists? Peano was a moron of
galactic proportions.

Replies: 10   Last Post: Oct 3, 2017 12:36 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 FromTheRafters Posts: 195 Registered: 12/20/15
Re: A more stupid Italian mythmatician exists? Peano was a moron of galactic proportions.
Posted: Sep 30, 2017 11:21 AM

Zelos Malum pretended :
> Den lördag 30 september 2017 kl. 14:28:13 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel:
>> He also thought of his ridiculous set theoretic construction of natural
>> numbers. I can't think of anything more illogical and absurd given that his
>> ordinals ASSUME the prior existence of natural numbers:
>>
>> 0 = {}
>> 1 = { {} }
>> 2 = { {}, { {} } }
>> 3 = { {}, { {} }, { {} , { {} } } }
>>
>> It didn't occur to Von Neumann that his ordinals assume the unit which
>> already includes substantial machinery to construct starting from nothing.
>> Essentially, all it does is count empty sets, but in order to count, one
>> must already have natural numbers for which prior construction is required.
>>
>> This aside, several new rules have to be implemented to make the nonsense
>> work. For example, if one tries to do arithmetic from inference, say add 0
>> and 1, there are two approaches:
>>
>> [A] 0 + 1 = {} + { {} } = { {}, { {} } } = 2
>>
>> [B] Since [A] does not yield the correct result, the addition is redefined
>> as a 'rule' in terms of Peano arithmetic which is the most laughable idea
>> ever produced by an idiot Italian mythmatician called Giuseppe Peano. It is
>> hard to think of anyone more stupid that Peano and his juvenile axioms.
>> Ironically, much of mainstream theory is based on this illogical rubbish:
>>
>>
>> Comments are unwelcome and will be ignored.
>>
>> Posted on this newsgroup in the interests of public education and to
>> eradicate ignorance and stupidity from mainstream mythmatics.
>>
>> gils...@gmail.com (MIT)
>> huiz...@psu.edu (HARVARD)
>> and...@mit.edu (MIT)
>> david....@math.okstate.edu (David Ullrich)
>> djo...@clarku.edu
>> mar...@gmail.com

>
> Peanos axioms doesn't assume natural numbers apriori, it works on the set
> theoretical construction which only assumes the sets and then choose toe
> represent natural numbers using sets.

You describe ZFC more than Peano. Peano basically stipulates that the
natural number one and the successor function exists.

Date Subject Author
9/30/17 zelos.malum@gmail.com
9/30/17 FromTheRafters
9/30/17 Me
9/30/17 Me
9/30/17 Me
9/30/17 Me
9/30/17 Pancho ValveJob
9/30/17 Dan Christensen
10/1/17 bursejan@gmail.com
10/3/17 Markus Klyver