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: 11   Last Post: Jan 5, 2013 10:30 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted: Jan 5, 2013 4:36 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article
WM <> wrote:

> On 4 Jan., 22:36, "Jesse F. Hughes" <> 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
about at all.
> 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".

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.