Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Matheology � 233
Replies: 37   Last Post: May 12, 2014 10:24 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 233
Posted: Apr 1, 2013 8:01 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article
<1dd2037c-407c-49f6-afc6-e00c1d8533e3@w21g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 1 Apr., 22:44, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>

> > > You do not believe that a sequence or list of all rational numbers can
> > > be constructed?

> >
> > One can "enumerate" the  set of all rationals by formula, as has been
> > quite often done, but not by physically listing all of them.

>
> A formula giving every entry is enough.

> >
> > Note that one cannot ennumerate by listing even sufficiently large
> > finite sets, so being listable other than by formula is not a  relevant
> > criterion.

>
> Constructing a list by a formula is enough to prove what I said.


And enough to disprove what WM has said as well.

AS a matter of fact, almost any honest math is enough to disprove much
of want WM has said.
--





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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.