On 4/17/2013 9:57 AM, WM wrote: > On 17 Apr., 16:27, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
>> >> No. What we have it one of your particular 'thought >> experiments' > > All mathematics is thought experiments.
Does WM confuse "one of your particular 'thought experiments'" with "all mathematics"?
It is well documented that WM has problems with singular terms.
> In order to maintain your > silly opinion, you would need two different values for n in (1, ..., > n) and as n.
Let's look at that again,
Here is WM's construction.
1 2, 1 3, 2, 1 ... n, ..., 3, 2, 1 ...
And here is the listing of the triangular numbers
1 :=> 1 2 :=> 3 3 :=> 6 4 :=> 10
and so on
To describe WM's version of mathematics, I would have to write
1=1 2=3 3=6 4=10
and so on
It seems that WM is the one invoking two different values for the same n.
>To refute that "idea" does not require a big thought > experiment
It appears that it did not
> (though every kind of thinking can be called a thought > experiment), but your argument will not attract but repulse any > mathematicians.
Never had much luck with them anyway.
> >> When the ancient Greeks actually considered what is >> involved with *calculation*, > > namely practical experiments with stones (limestones, calcis or > chalculi) or thought experiments describing such calculations.