Virgil
Posts:
8,833
Registered:
1/6/11


Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted:
Jan 5, 2013 6:56 PM


In article <559dcb415aea496d81948c3fa8f80e5d@v7g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fhaugsburg.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. 

