Date: Jan 17, 2013 11:44 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: WMatheology § 191
On 17 Jan., 17:38, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:

> On 1/17/2013 4:52 AM, WM wrote:

>

> > On 17 Jan., 08:42, Ralf Bader <ba...@nefkom.net> wrote:

>

> >> In a similar way it seems to be

> >> impossible for M ckenheim to grasp something actually (not in the

> >> always-growing sense) countably infinite without a boundary at the far end.

>

> > Not at all! I consider and vivdly imagine the actually infinite set of

> > all terminating decimal representations of the reals containg all

> > natural numbers as indices. Alas I cannot imagine that there is

> > another decimal representations of the reals which deviates from all

> > of them. Can you?

>

> Then, do irrational numbers exist

> transiently on a problem by problem

> basis? (Vacuum energy numbers)

They exist in many forms but certainly not as never ending decimal

representations that somehow manage to end or at least to be complete

nevertheless.

Regards, WM