Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology § 246
Replies: 246   Last Post: Apr 26, 2013 2:37 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 David C. Ullrich Posts: 3,555 Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Matheology � 246
Posted: Apr 14, 2013 10:46 AM

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 11:52:36 -0700 (PDT), WM
<mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

>On 13 Apr., 19:59, dullr...@sprynet.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 09:58:39 -0700 (PDT), WM
>>
>> <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

>> >On 13 Apr., 16:47, dullr...@sprynet.com wrote:
>>
>> >> Curiously you deleted my statement of exactly what error of
>> >> yours I was referring to. Why was that?

>>
>> >What do you allude to? Why don't you repeat it, if it was important?
>>
>> You asserted that "He concludes that this remains true for the limits
>> of
>> the list numbers r and d by using the argument: different sequences
>> have different limits."
>>
>> And that is simply not true.

>
>Remember, what you said: Only cases like 0.999... = 1.000... can lead
>to same limits. This holds if you have digits a_n multiplied by powers
>of 10^-n. But Cantor simply used bits that he called w and m. Without
>a topology, there are no limits at all! There are only strings of
>bits. So also the anti-diagonal d is not a limit - it is simply a
>string of bits without end. And of that kind you can find behind every
>finite string of bits (d_1, ..., d_n) the same string repeated
>infinitely often. For every n. Further nothing happens in the list.

You're changing the subject. At the start of this you were talking
lists of decimals, just lists of strings of bits.

So what? No, of course things that I said about lists of decimals
will not be true of lists of strings of bits. The argument you
now say you're talking about shows that the set of striings
of bits is uncountable.

And once again you're showing a complete lack of
integrity. You _said_ that the argument uses the
false assertion that different sequences have different
limits. No, the argument about lists of decimals does not
use that non-fact. _Now_ you claim that you're talking
instead of something else, just lists of strings of bitts.
Ignoring for a second the fact that there _is_ a
natural topology in that context as well, let's throw
out the topolgy. Fine. Now there are no limits in sight.
Fine.

If there are no limits anywhere in the theorem or
proof that just makes it much more clear that your
statement that the argument uses the fact that
different sequences have different limits is simply
not true.

>>
>> > I
>> >delete all phrases which I do not consider important for the further
>> >discussion. Otherwise the post would be too long.
>> >But if you think a bit about the following questions, you will
>> >certainly recognize that your attempts are in vain, to find an error
>> >in my theory:

>>
>> >A) {1} U {1, 2} U {1, 2, 3} U ...
>> >B) {1}, {1, 2}, {1, 2, 3}, ...
>> >C) {1}, {1} U {1, 2}, {1} U {1, 2} U {1, 2, 3}, {1} U {1, 2} U {1, 2,
>> >3} U ..., ...
>> >Is A contained in C?

>>
>> No, of course not.

>
>Then let me know the first natural number that is in A but not in C.

Why? I didn't say there was a natural number in A that's not in C.

>You know that every non-empty set of natural numbers has a first
>element. That is even true in common mathematics without any set
>theory.

>>
>> >Is anything in C that is not in B?
>>
>> >In case you tend to answer the first question with a resounding no
>> >be prepared to find something of A that is not contained in C - as
>> >custom has it in mathematics.

>>
>> A = {1,2,3,...}, and that set is not in B.

>
>I appreciate your clear speech. But I do not believe you. So I invite
>you to determine a natural number, possibly the first one, that is in
>A but not in B.

Why? I never saiid that there was a number in A that's not in C.

>Please be aware, that I require mathematics, not matheology. In the
>latter case the faithful believe that A contains only all finite
>natural numbers and that B also contains all finite natural numbers,

A "finite natural number" is the same as a natural number.
There are no infinite natural numbers.

>but that the U has some magig power like the horseshoe that Bohr hat
>nailed above the door of his summer house. And when Heisenberg asked
>him, whether he, Bohr, was superstitious believing in good luck spent
>by the horseshoe, Bohr answered, no, he did not believe, but the
>horseshoe is said to be of help inspite of that.
>
>Well, please do not use such arguments. Speak frankly, what is missing
>in B that is present in A?

Maybe you didn't give the definitions of A and B correctly.
A is a set of numbers. B is not a set of numbers, B is a list
of sets of numbers.

So asking for a number in A not in B makes no sense, there
are no numbers in B in the first place. B is a list of sets
of numbers. A is a set of numbers not in B. Answering

>Sets are differing by elements. If all
>elements of A are in B and vice versa, then by Zermelo's first axiom,
>A = B.
>
>Regards, WM

Date Subject Author
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 JT
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 Virgil
4/13/13 fom
4/12/13 Scott Berg
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Scott Berg
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 David C. Ullrich
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 Virgil
4/12/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/12/13 Tanu R.
4/12/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 Virgil
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Bergholt Stuttley Johnson
4/13/13 Virgil
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 Tanu R.
4/14/13 Virgil
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 Virgil
4/13/13 fom
4/12/13 Virgil
4/12/13 Virgil
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 David C. Ullrich
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 fom
4/13/13 David C. Ullrich
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 dan.ms.chaos@gmail.com
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 Virgil
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 Tanu R.
4/14/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Virgil
4/14/13 David C. Ullrich
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 fom
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 fom
4/15/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/15/13 Virgil
4/15/13 fom
4/16/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/16/13 Bergholt Stuttley Johnson
4/16/13 Virgil
4/14/13 Virgil
4/14/13 Virgil
4/15/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/15/13 Bergholt Stuttley Johnson
4/15/13 Virgil
4/16/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/16/13 Virgil
4/16/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/16/13 fom
4/16/13 Virgil
4/16/13 fom
4/17/13 Virgil
4/16/13 Virgil
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Tanu R.
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 Tanu R.
4/17/13 gus gassmann
4/18/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/18/13 fom
4/21/13 gus gassmann
4/21/13 fom
4/22/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/22/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/22/13 Bergholt Stuttley Johnson
4/24/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/24/13 Virgil
4/25/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/25/13 fom
4/25/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/25/13 Tanu R.
4/25/13 Tanu R.
4/26/13 Bergholt Stuttley Johnson
4/25/13 Virgil
4/22/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/22/13 fom
4/22/13 gus gassmann
4/22/13 gus gassmann
4/22/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/22/13 fom
4/22/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/22/13 fom
4/22/13 Virgil
4/22/13 Virgil
4/23/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/23/13 fom
4/23/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/23/13 fom
4/23/13 Virgil
4/24/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/24/13 Virgil
4/23/13 fom
4/24/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/24/13 Virgil
4/24/13 fom
4/25/13 Virgil
4/23/13 Virgil
4/22/13 Virgil
4/18/13 Virgil
4/19/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/19/13 fom
4/19/13 fom
4/19/13 Virgil
4/19/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/19/13 fom
4/19/13 fom
4/19/13 Virgil
4/18/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/18/13 fom
4/18/13 Virgil
4/18/13 fom
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 Bergholt Stuttley Johnson
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Tanu R.
4/18/13 fom
4/17/13 fom
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/17/13 Virgil
4/17/13 fom
4/15/13 fom
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Tanu R.
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Virgil
4/13/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/13/13 Virgil
4/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
4/14/13 Tanu R.
4/14/13 Virgil
4/13/13 Virgil