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: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Replies: 2   Last Post: Jan 4, 2013 2:37 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 2,665
Registered: 6/29/07
Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted: Jan 4, 2013 2:37 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jan 4, 8:13 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <> wrote:
> Zuhair <> writes:
> > Dear fom I'm not against Uncountability, I'm not against Cantor's
> > argument. I'm saying that Cantor's argument is CORRECT. All what I'm
> > saying is that it is COUNTER-INTUITIVE as it violates the
> > Distinguishability argument which is an argument that comes from
> > intuition excerised in the FINITE world. That's all.

> But you've neither explained the meaning of your second premise nor
> given any indication why it is plausible.

I did but you just missed it.

My second premise is that finite distinguishability is countable.

What I meant by that is that we can only have countably many
distinguishable finite initial segments of reals. And this has already
been proved. There is no plausibility here, this is a matter that is
agreed upon.

> --
> Jesse F. Hughes
> "How lucky we are to be able to hear how miserable Willie Nelson could
> imagine himself to be." -- Ken Tucker on Fresh Air

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.