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: § 534 Finis
Replies: 30   Last Post: Feb 22, 2015 8:14 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 10,821
Registered: 6/8/11
Re: i?? 534 Finis
Posted: Aug 8, 2014 5:58 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article <ls3emp$vcg$>, Sam Sung <no@mail.invalid>

> drivels:

> > I have a proof about all natural numbers. It applies to all natural
> > numbers.
> > It shows that "all natural numbers" is a non-existing notion in
> > mathematics.

> Nonsense, once its defined, the set is there - consider this:
> Is the set of all chess positions completed although when there will
> most probably never be a chance to list them all together? Yes, the
> set of all chess positions is completed of course, BECAUSE it does
> NOT CHANGE things, whether one prints them or prints them not - all
> these chess positions are fixed by its DEFINING rules and NOTHING
> CHANGES if one prints anyone of them or not.

At least not outside of WM's worthless world of WMytheology.

In a WMytheological Chess game, the rules would always flex in midgame
in ways allowing WM always to win!
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)

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.