Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


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


Re: Cantor's absurdity, once again, why not?
Posted:
Mar 16, 2013 6:38 PM


In article <1aa5a039c0c449ceb1f73286994b3112@w3g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fhaugsburg.de> wrote:
> On 16 Mrz., 22:20, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > <ee21d4f5aa664c4b8d53700304185...@14g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>, > > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fhaugsburg.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. > > I agree, but you have misunderstood or not read carefully enough.
Since both "given object" and "material object" are mentioned and pointing to material objects is a common way of identifying them, it is WM whose reading skills are sloppy.
***********************************************************************
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. 



