> He had a split tongue in this respect. There are quotes in favour and > quotes against actual infinity. Cantor himself named him among the > opponents of actual infinity: D'ALEMBERT, ARISTOTELES, CAUCHY, > CAVALIERI, FULLERTON, GALILEI, GAUSS, GERDIL, GOUDIN, GULDIN, > LAGRANGE, LEIBNIZ, MOIGNO, NEWTON, PERERIUS, PESCH, RENOUVIER, > SANSEVERINO, TONGIORGI, TORRICELLI, ZIGLIARA. > > Regards, WM
Summing up supporters for or against a cause (and wrongly so) is not in itself an argument for or against it .
"I am so in favor of the actual infinite that instead of admitting that Nature abhors it, as is commonly said, I hold that Nature makes frequent use of it everywhere, in order to show more effectively the perfections of its Author. Thus I believe that there is no part of matter which is not, I do not say divisible, but actually divided; and consequently the least particle ought to be considered as a world full of an infinity of different creatures." -Leibniz , the co-inventor of calculus .
The only reason he seemed to have had 'a split tongue' is his attempt to make himself understood to those who's minds were , shall we say , limited by finitude , and , as always , try and make a unified system within which all the different perspectives would be integrated .You make no such attempt, nor could you , given you immense lack of understanding. "Burn the witches! Ban the infinite!" .
"The continuum actually consists of infinitely many indivisibles" - Galilei
I could continue, but it's a futile endeavor. The answer to both your questions is no.