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



fom
Posts:
1,968
Registered:
12/4/12


Re: Cantor's absurdity, once again, why not?
Posted:
Mar 18, 2013 12:31 AM


On 3/17/2013 8:45 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: > In <DPWdncbt4PfeGN_MnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@giganews.com>, on 03/14/2013 > at 09:19 PM, fom <fomJUNK@nyms.net> said: > >> Among all of the possible statement concerning a philosophy of >> mathematics that you could have chosen, the one you did is exactly >> the negation of my philosophy. > > See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair>. >
Thank you.
I did post an open apology to the professionals on this site in view of my other posts.
news://news.giganews.com:119/ZfKdnQxJds3UldzMnZ2dnUVZ_rdnZ2d@giganews.com
If you read through it you will find that I have identified "mathematics that does not necessarily obey distributive laws" as being central to that with which I have been struggling.
Among the places where that occurs, is in the "language equivalence" of automata with respect to regular sets of accepting strings formed from concatenations. It is under that notion of equivalence where distributive laws can equate deterministic and nondeterministic machines.
I suspect, in part, that that accounts for why the geometries I have been using quickly led to geometries of interest to the applied fields.
Now that I am able to fit my ideas into traditional frameworks, you will see no more claims along those lines.



