|
|
Re: Re: Matheology § 162
Posted:
Nov 29, 2012 1:12 PM
|
|
In article <c89b62f0-d926-4b1b-a0ae-8d899d76fa28@n8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes:
>On 29 Nov., 14:27, mstem...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote:
>> In article <54e3fdd3-12f9-449e-8d84-ef2782e34...@a15g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes:
>> >On 28 Nov., 19:20, mstem...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote:
>> >> >Have you meanwhile convinced yourself that analysis is capable
>> >> >expanding infinity
>>
>> >> "Expanding infinity"? What on Earth is that supposed to mean? In math,
>> >> one is supposed to define their terms.
>>
>> >An expansion of a number is a power series giving its value.
>>
>> But, there is no such number as "infinity", so your words are still
>> gibberish.
>
>In set theory, there is such a number.
Repeating a lie does not make it true. Set theory (at least ZF) does not
have a number called "infinity".
> In analysis there is such an
>improper limit,
And the reason that it's called an "improper limit" is because limits
are properly numbers, and it's not a number.
> an element of the extended reals.
I've not studied the extended reals. I am aware that oo is an element of
them. But, is it called a "number" in that case?
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Twenty-four hours in a day; twenty-four beers in a case. Coincidence?
|
|
