Virgil
Posts:
4,482
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: Matheology � 062
Posted:
Jul 8, 2012 2:28 AM
|
|
In article
<81559447-62a8-41de-a032-4f3d8e636903@h10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
William Hughes <wpihughes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 12:15 pm, "LudovicoVan" <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote:
> > "WM" <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote in message
> >
> > news:6ed4b3b7-14a1-42ba-beb6-c0fe3a1cfd1c@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
> > <snip>
> >
> > > After 1 hour the urn is empty, because for every number the time of
> > > removal can be determined. So for the set X of numbers residing in the
> > > urn we obtain
> > > Lim |X| =/= |Lim X|
> > > This prevents any application of set theory to reality although it was
> > > Cantor's outspoken aim to apply set theory to reality (cp., e.g., his
> > > letter to Mittag-Leffler of Sept., 22, 1884).
> >
> > That argument is simply *wrong*, it does not show a problem in set theory
> > (not in itself at least). From "every (finitely-labeled!) ball has been
> > removed at step w" one cannot conclude "the vase is empty at step w",
> > period.
> >
> > -LV
>
> One can certainly conclude that the vase does not
> contain any finitely-labeled balls. If we define
> |X| to be the number of finitely-labeled balls
> then WM's conclusion follows.
The conclusion that the urn is empty (at least of those numbered balls)
is one that WM has opposed in other posts, and he only presents it here
to claim it makes standard set theory unreal.
Whereas it is really WMatheology which partakes deeply of unreality.
--
|
|
