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: UNCOUNTABILITY
Replies: 59   Last Post: Dec 24, 2012 2:06 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
ross.finlayson@gmail.com

Posts: 2,720
Registered: 2/15/09
Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Posted: Dec 20, 2012 11:02 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Dec 20, 3:11 am, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 20, 7:52 am, George Greene <gree...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On Dec 19, 4:11 pm, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > So having parameters in the defining formulas provides the grounds for
> > > POSSIBILITY of having uncountably many sets definable after them. But
> > > what PROVES the existence of uncountabily many parameter definable
> > > reals is of course the diagonal argument of Cantor.

>
> > Surely you must realize by now that attacking the diagonal argument
> > (actually the direct construction of the ANTI-diagonal of a PRESUMED
> > omegaXomega square) is THE #1 FAVORITE crank pastime around here.
> > By posting this you are just inviting every crank from WM on down
> > to do battle with you.  You are new enough that this my seem
> > worthwhile
> > to you, BUT IT ISN'T.  I'm not saying that JUST because I'm burnt out
> > after 20 years.
> > I'm saying it because it really is obvious from even casual
> > consideration
> > that LOGIC means NOTHING to these people!  They DON'T CARE if you/we
> > have
> > a proof!  THEY have THEIR canards and maxims and precepts, and THAT'S
> > ALL
> > THEY care about!  Progress is not really possible along a merely
> > intellectual
> > front (merely intellectual, our position is simply far too easy to
> > confirm).
> > A unified wall of contempt stands a better chance.

>
> I didn't really read this last line. What do you mean by that?
>
> Zuhair


Of course our esteemed George Greene shouldn't be vilified for
expressing his opinions, either. And, it's fair to note that compared
to mathoverflow, and other available Internet communication platforms,
that quixotic jousting to the infinite is over-represented among
suitable topics on mathematics and the development of mathematics. It
is a fallacy to read too much into his words beyond leaving them as
indeterminate and the common fallacy of overgeneralization, as it
would be to hew to it.

Then while that's so and Greene is respectable, mathematical progress
is by definition different than what there was before, where
mathematics is true: more. And: a stalwart, stoic, static, stoney,
silence on that: yes, there is more to foundations than the modern,
is only that.

Regards,

Ross Finlayson


Date Subject Author
12/19/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
george
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Barb Knox
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
William Hughes
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
William Hughes
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
William Hughes
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
William Hughes
12/24/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/24/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/24/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
William Hughes
12/24/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/24/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
William Hughes
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Zaljohar@gmail.com
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/22/12
Read Re: COUNTABILITY of a set requires N to surject to it
Virgil
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/22/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/23/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/20/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Virgil
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper
12/21/12
Read Re: UNCOUNTABILITY
Graham Cooper

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.