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 § 265
Replies: 5   Last Post: May 17, 2013 6:15 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 4,344
Registered: 5/20/10
Re: Matheology § 265
Posted: May 14, 2013 8:10 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On May 12, 7:48 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> Matheology § 265
>
> Abstract. This paper examines the possibilities of extending Cantor?s
> two arguments on the uncountable nature of the set of real numbers to
> one of its proper denumerable subsets: the set of rational numbers.



There is Real Mathematical Calculus

f(r):R->R

and there is LOGIC.

A:[0|1| -> B:[0|1]

--------------------------

Cantor's muffles the 2 arrows together into an infinite
sum of logical conditionals and pulls out hyper-contradictions
from his bellybutton.

Any REAL MATHEMATICS is based on equivalent FUNCTIONS
defined over N!

f(n):N -> R

In CALCULUS you are allowed to use f(r):R -> R
but underneath you must have some definable domain

f( g(n):N ) -> R

where g(n) COMPUTES the real domain of the function
via integer arithmetic.

LOGIC and f(r):R DO NOT MIX!

f(r):R is just a CALCULUS SHORTHAND!


NEWTON would hit CANTOR with a STICK if he saw the mess
that CANTOR made of his CALCULUS!


Herc
--
ALL NEW www.BLOCKPROLOG.com




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.