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: Peer-reviewed arguments against Cantor Diagonalization
Replies: 23   Last Post: Nov 2, 2012 1:46 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Peer-reviewed arguments against Cantor Diagonalization
Posted: Nov 1, 2012 12:07 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article <k6rvjb$svg$>,
"LudovicoVan" <> wrote:

> "Jesse F. Hughes" <> wrote in message

> > "LudovicoVan" <> writes:
> >> "Jesse F. Hughes" <> wrote in message
> >>

> >>> "LudovicoVan" <> writes:
> >>>> "Jesse F. Hughes" <> wrote in message
> >>>>

> >> <snipped>
> >>

> >>>>> But when we judge your capacity for reasoning in general, we may well
> >>>>> remember your screed that ZFC is a falsehood perpetrated on the masses
> >>>>> just because, well, the illuminati are so darned used to lying that
> >>>>> they
> >>>>> lie about math, too.

> >>>>
> >>>> I judge too mate, and you now find out where exactly I said that ZFC is
> >>>> the root of evil.

> >>>
> >>> To be perfectly honest, I've no idea how I ought to interpret the above
> >>> response. I've no idea what you mean.
> >>>
> >>> Are you indeed honestly saying that ZFC is the root of evil? Or is this
> >>> sarcastic? For myself, I haven't a clue.

> >>
> >> Argh! My bad (English): I meant to say please find out where exactly I
> >> said
> >> that ZFC is the root of evil, intending that I have never said any such
> >> thing. My tirades have to do with global politics and policies, not with
> >> this or that specifics.

> >
> > I never said you thought that set theory was a root of evil, but, near
> > as I can figger, you said that it was a symptom of a lying culture which
> > lies just 'cause it can.

> You could say because it wants, not because it can: anyway, you rephrase it
> as a 13 year old would, but yes, let's say you almost got it, son, though
> not quite. OTOH, I am pretty sure you could do better, if only you could be
> any little more honest.

> > In an honest culture, we would all admit that
> > set theory is a plain falsehood.

> No, I have never said that: there are indeed things that I find are patently
> wrong, the standard theory of cardinality being one of them, but that does
> not mean I'd discard the baby too. Not to mention that we all have "search"
> strategies, and a world of fools and criminals means just do not expect that
> I be a gentlemen. It's a war, mate.

> > If this is an accurate representation of what you meant, then you are
> > indeed an idiot.

> It is far from accurate, but no worries: I still have way to go before I can
> compete with you at that level.

> > If not, feel free to correct my misunderstanding of your insights.
> As long as you have no ethics, you remain incorrigible.
> Now, have we finished with this confrontation? Even Virgil is losing his
> temper...
> -LV

Possibly with you, but not with Jesse.

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.