The Math Forum

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: Matheology § 233
Replies: 20   Last Post: Apr 4, 2013 10:16 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 846
Registered: 11/27/09
Re: Matheology § 233
Posted: Apr 2, 2013 11:36 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Le 02.04.2013 22:10, WM a écrit :
> On 2 Apr., 00:25, William Hughes <> wrote:
>> On Apr 1, 11:08 pm, WM <> wrote:

>>> On 1 Apr., 17:05, William Hughes <> wrote:> On Mar 27, 8:55 am, WM <> wrote:
>>>>> Matheology § 233
>>>>> The set of all termination decimals is a subset of Q. If the set of
>>>>> all terminating decimals of the unit interval is arranged as set of
>>>>> all terminating paths of the decimal tree,

>>>> It is, of course, impossible to write this out
>>>> (the number of terminating decimals is infinite).

>>> But
>> Nope, no new arguments before you concede that
>> the bit about not being able to write stuff out
>> was nonsense

> Again you confuse different infinities!
> It is nonsense to claim the existence of all bits or digits of an
> actually infinite sequence of bits or digits.
> It is correct to claim the existence of every bit or digit of an
> infinite sequence that is defined by a finite formula such that every
> bit or digit in principle can be determined in finite time. (Potential
> infinity.)
> Regards, WM

Oh my God! WM is posting something stupid on the Internet, should
I reply?

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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.