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 § 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: 4,495
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 <> 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


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!


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.