Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum


Math Forum
 Ask Dr. Math
 Discussions
 Internet Newsletter
 MathTools
 Problems of the Week
 Teacher2Teacher
 Teacher Exchange
 Workshops

Search All of the Math Forum:
Browse our Internet Mathematics Library

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
Reply to this Topic Reply to this Topic

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

Posts: 4,486
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 214
Posted: Feb 11, 2013 4:47 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article
<70fda173-0855-4819-b100-6f9254064b3c@e10g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> > This is Cantor's argument.
>
> Yes he made the same step. And his followers gladly accepted it. He
> exchanged quantifyers on his "extended integers":
> "For every integer n, there exists integer m: m >= n"
> to
> "There exists integer m, such that for every integer n: m >= n."

That might be true in Wolkenmuekenheim but nowhere else.

And whatever Cantor may have said, it was not said with the current
notion of integer in mind.
--





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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2013. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.