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 ]
Virgil

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$1@speranza.aioe.org>, Sam Sung <no@mail.invalid>
wrote:

> mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de 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!
--
Virgil
"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.