Virgil
Posts:
4,663
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted:
Jan 5, 2013 6:56 PM
|
|
In article
<559dcb41-5aea-496d-8194-8c3fa8f80e5d@v7g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 5 Jan., 17:47, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> > On 1/5/2013 6:56 AM, WM wrote:
> >
> > > Nonsense. A real number need not be given by a string of digits. In
> > > most cases that is even impossible. Given is a finite definition like
> > > "pi". And this is distinct from all other real numbers.
> >
> > "pi" is certainly a finite string used as a name.
>
> But it allows to calculate a potentially infinite string. i.e., a
> finite string with more than any given number of digits.
> >
> > Please offer a (Russellian) description that attaches it
> > to an idea of number.
> >
> > And, since you make provability an issue in these matters,
> > please show that your description is uniquely distinguishing
> > pi from other numbers.
>
> I show it by what you think when reading my pi.
To be as sure as you claim, ,you would have to be a mindreader and read
the mind of someone your have probably never met and don't know where to
find.
> Mathematics is discourse, sending and receiving messages.
So is Morse code.
--
|
|
