Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Replies: 11   Last Post: Jan 5, 2013 10:30 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Virgil Posts: 8,833 Registered: 1/6/11
Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted: Jan 5, 2013 4:36 PM

In article
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 4 Jan., 22:36, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:
>

> > Clearly, the set of reals is pairwise distinguishable but not totally
> > distinguishable.  But so what?

>
> A good question. A set distinguishable by such an n would necessarily
> be finite. Do you think that anybody, and in particular Zuhair, claims
> that |R is finite? Or did you miss this implication?
>
> A set S of infinite strings of digits (the God of matheology may
> present the strings without defining them in another way) is finitely
> distinguishable if for all x, y in S, if x != y then there is an m in |
> N (i.e., a finite index) such that x_m != y_m.

The "god" of WMytheology, namely WM himself, will insist that every such
potential string must have a finite definition in order to be thought
>
> Regards, WM

Actually, real math suggests that there are reals so incredibly
inaccessible that finding the digit sequence representing one of them is
not possible.

In which case such numbers may well not be "finitely distinguishable".
--

Date Subject Author
1/4/13 Jesse F. Hughes
1/5/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13 fom
1/5/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13 Virgil
1/5/13 Virgil
1/5/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13 Virgil
1/5/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13 Virgil
1/5/13 fom