Date: Jan 5, 2013 10:30 PM
Author: fom
Subject: Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
On 1/5/2013 5:58 PM, Virgil wrote:

> In article

> <553bf1fb-5267-47c9-ba16-70e7f6f4db8d@u19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,

> WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

>

>> On 5 Jan., 22:36, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

>>

>>> Actually, real math suggests that there are reals so incredibly

>>> inaccessible that finding the digit sequence representing one of them is

>>> not possible.

>>>

>>> In which case such numbers may well not be "finitely distinguishable".

>>> --

>>

>> And they cannot be used in any way in a discourse or in mathematics or

>> spring off a Cantor-list.

>>

>> So, why talk about them at all?

>

> Because if they are not there, some of the necessary properties of the

> real number field are also not there.

>

Yes. These discussions have been leading

that way.

All of us deal with the world relative to

partial information. That is what is actual.

But, to survive one must speculate as to how

independent pieces of information relate to

one another as parts related to a whole.

Apparently, this natural inclination of the

human organism is to be denied in mathematical

pursuits.