Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Matheology § 214
Replies: 19   Last Post: Feb 11, 2013 4:56 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de

Posts: 14,649
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 214
Posted: Feb 11, 2013 3:43 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 11 Feb., 08:48, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> In article
> <b96a20cb-7991-4a49-84ca-6bd658501...@w7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
>    WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>

> >> Every potentially infinite set already exists.
>
> > But none of them are, or ever can become, infinite.

They cannot "become" actually infinite.
>
> Since such "sets" are neither finite nor not finite (infinite), they are
> nonexistent.
>
> And in van Dalen, p 118, a letter from Brouwer summarising his thesis:
>   "I can formulate:
>        1.  Actual infinite sets can be created mathematically"


As I already mentioned, that is due to an understandable error. At
that time mathematicians were drilled to understand by the finite
expression "0.111..." an actually infinite sequence of digits. That is
wrong.

Regards, WM



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.