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: Cantor's first proof in DETAILS
Replies: 3   Last Post: Nov 25, 2012 9:09 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Jesse F. Hughes

Posts: 9,776
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Cantor's first proof in DETAILS
Posted: Nov 25, 2012 4:56 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

"Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> writes:

> On Nov 25, 12:53 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>> In article
>> <8e72f34b-4acb-4e8d-9797-f3b217e4e...@i7g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>,
>>  "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

>> > So, we know from modern particle physics that the particle, is both
>> > particle, and wave.

>>
>> What we do know is that those things we sometimes regard as being
>> small-and-particle-like things have some behaviors that are wave-like.
>>
>> What those "things"REALLY are, we do not know.
>>
>> And most of the time, don't much care, as long as our descriptions of
>> how we expect them to behave match our observations of how they do
>> behave!
>> --

>
>
> Well that's simple, you're not a conscientious mathematician, who
> cares.
>
> Heh, you describe exactly the fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantium.


Let's add that fallacy to the enormous list of things Russell doesn't
understand.

--
Jesse F. Hughes
Playin' dismal hollers for abysmal dollars,
Those were the days, best I can recall.
-- Austin Lounge Lizards, "Rocky Byways"



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.