The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Why do we need those real non-constructible numbers?
Replies: 1   Last Post: Nov 9, 2017 4:10 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View

Posts: 3,394
Registered: 10/18/08
Re: Why do we need those real non-constructible numbers?
Posted: Nov 9, 2017 4:10 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Am Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 09:52:09 UTC+1 schrieb John Gabriel:
> On Thursday, 9 November 2017 01:45:55 UTC-5, WM wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 00:20:12 UTC+1 schrieb John Gabriel:
> >
> >

> > > In fact WM, if you try to state that half itself or any other portion of itself measures it, then you've already assumed that the whole has a measure. That's incorrect.
> >
> > I assume that the diagonal of a square has a length.

> Of course a diagonal has a length, but it has no measure.
> Length =/= measure

Here you are a greater purist than me. But would it cause mathematics going astray when lenght is equated with measure of length and number is equated with measure?

Regards, WM

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.