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: � 534 Finis
Replies: 4   Last Post: Aug 19, 2014 1:58 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 2,453
Registered: 6/8/11
Re: � 534 Finis
Posted: Aug 19, 2014 1:45 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article <cfe794d2-c6d2-4ec8-ad2f-0ca8657f1631@googlegroups.com>,
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:

> On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 17:48:23 UTC+2, Zeit Geist wrote:
>
>

> > > If the list has not a finite definition, then every line has to be used
> > > to determine the corresponding digit. That means every digit has to be
> > > determined separately.

> >
> >
> >
> > If the Particular List has Not a Finite Definition, then it does Matter.

>
> Of course.
>
> For the Diagonal Proof is Valid for any List of Real Numbers. All that is
> Required is that there is a Unique Decimal Sequence Associated with each
> Natural Number.
>
> Numbers are defined by digits.
>
>
> Since each Decimal Sequence can be Shown to Represent Real Number, EVEN IF
> WE DON'T KNOW WHICH REAL IS ASSOCIATED TO WHICH NATURAL, we Find a Real
> Number Not Enumerated by any Natural Number. Therefore it is Not on the
> List. Again, ABSTRACTION!


The definition of a set being countable requires that its members be
listable.
Cantor's proof that no list of reals can list all reals proves that the
set of reals does not satisfy the definition of countability and is
therefore not countable.

> > The Set of Finitely Definable Real Numbers is NOT COUNTABLE!
> >
> > Proof has been Given,

>
> No. Not in mathematics.


Maybe not in WM's worthless world of WMytheology but definitely so in
all proper mathematics outside the corruption of that WMytheology.
>
> If we define the real numbers in a strictly formal system, where only finite
> derivations and fixed symbols are permitted, then these real numbers can
> certainly be enumerated because the formulas and derivations on the basis of
> their constructive definition are countable.


But if every infinite string of decimal digits ( other than those ending
in all 9's) corresponds to a real number in [0,1), then that limited set
of reals in [0,1) is not even countable, much less all of |R.
--
Virgil
"Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)


Date Subject Author
8/19/14
Read Re: � 534 Finis
Virgil
8/19/14
Read Re: � 534 Finis
Virgil

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.