Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


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

Topic: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
Replies: 101   Last Post: Nov 25, 2012 5:08 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Posted: Nov 24, 2012 3:34 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article
<0ee396a8-91e7-4221-82e6-bed81af08331@o30g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 23 Nov., 22:37, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>

> > Analysis can show that the limit VALUE is oo in the extended reals, but
> > does not presume to claim that there is a decimal, or any other place
> > value based numeral, representing that limit value.

>
> If the limit value
> Limit[n-->oo] SUM[k=0 to n] a_k*10^k = oo
> is accepted in the extended reals, then it is simply ridiculous to
> claim that the abbreviation
> ..., a_k, ..., a_3, a_2, a_1, a_0
> is not in the abbreviations of the extended reals.


The only such "abbreviations" in standard use for "extended reals are
oo for the one point compactification or +oo and -oo for the two point
compactification. Anything else exists only in Wolkenmuekenheim.

>
> But William had agreed: "On the contrary, the fact that the analytic
> *limit* cannot be described in terms of digits is the point."
>
> And he stated proudly:
>
> Analysis:
> limit in real numbers: unbounded
> (oo in extended reals)
> limit of set of 1's: not estimated
>
> Set Theory
> limit in real numbers: not estimated
> limit of set of 1's: {}
>
> Therefore he would have to confess now that there is a contradiction
> between set theory and analysis.


To say that different definitions of "limit" can give different results
only confuses WM, not anyone else.

But confusion is the norm in WMytheology.



> On the other hand we know the first commandment of

WMytheology
>
> There's no con-
> tra-dic-tion!
> There's no con-
> tra-dic-tion!
> There's no con-
> tra-dic-tion!
> ...
>
> Regards, WM

--




Date Subject Author
11/18/12
Read Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/18/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Vurgil
11/18/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/18/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Vurgil
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Vurgil
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Vurgil
11/20/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/20/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
William Hughes
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/24/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/24/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/24/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/24/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/25/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/25/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/25/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/25/12
Read Re: WMatheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/23/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/21/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/19/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Vurgil
11/20/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
11/20/12
Read Re: Matheology � 154: Consistency Proof!
Virgil
11/22/12
Read Re: Matheology § 154: Consistency Proof!
David Valdez

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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.