Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
Virgil
Posts:
4,482
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: Cantor's absurdity, once again, why not?
Posted:
Mar 16, 2013 5:20 PM
|
|
In article
<ee21d4f5-aa66-4c4b-8d53-700304185c84@14g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 16 Mrz., 16:01, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
>
> > perhaps you could explain what you mean
> > by "given object" and how an immaterial
> > object can be given.
>
> It cannot be given other than by naming it (except from clumsy
> approaches by means of sign language).
I do not regard pointing at a thing to identify it as being at all
clumsy.
Pointing to things on a blackboard is often considerably less clumsy
than any other way of referring to them. But blackboards may be too
outre to be used in WM's world.
***********************************************************************
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.
--
|
|
|
|
