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:
Cantor's absurdity, once again, why not?
Replies:
77
Last Post:
Mar 19, 2013 11:02 PM



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


Re: Cantor's absurdity, once again, why not?
Posted:
Mar 14, 2013 7:15 PM


In article <0ede2fea122147ebb10e5fc31255b4fb@a14g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fhaugsburg.de> wrote:
> On 14 Mrz., 22:03, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote: > > > Let me ask you about this notion of falsifiability. I presume that > > you'd agree that Fermat's theorem, > > > > (An > 2)NOT(E a,b,c)( a^n + b^n = c^n ) > > > > is falsifiable, since if it is false, we can show that it is false by > > producing n, a, b and c such that > > > > n > 2 and a^n + b^n = c^n . > > > > So that is a proper mathematical statement (or whatever), right? > > This is trivial enough for you to understand. > Obviously it is above the horizon of many matheologians to understand > that R > N bears a contradiction, since elements of a set must all > be distinguishable, that means definable by finite words
One can often in the real world distinguish things without naming them, but apparently not in Wolkenmuekenheim.
In Wolkenmuekenheim, if WM does not have a name for something he apparently cannot distinguish it from anything else that he does have a name for.
***********************************************************************
WM has frequently claimed that a mapping from the set of all infinite binary sequences to the set of paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping. In order to show that such a mapping is a linear mapping, WM must first show that the set of all binary sequences is a vector space and that the set of paths of a CIBT is also a vector space, which he has not done and apparently cannot do, and then show that his mapping satisfies the linearity requirement that f(ax + by) = af(x) + bf(y), where a and b are arbitrary members of a field of scalars and x and y are f(x) and f(y) are vectors in suitable linear spaces.
By the way, WM, what are a, b, ax, by and ax+by when x and y are binary sequences?
If a = 1/3 and x is binary sequence, what is ax ? and if f(x) is a path in a CIBT, what is af(x)?
Until these and a few other issues are settled, WM will still have failed to justify his claim of a LINEAR mapping from the set (but not yet proved to be vector space) of binary sequences to the set (but not yet proved to be vector space) of paths ln a CIBT.
Just another of WM's many wild claims of what goes on in his WMytheology that he cannot back up.
. 



