Date: Jan 26, 2013 4:50 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: ZFC and God
In article <ke0gdo$5s2$1@Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca>,

gus gassmann <gus@nospam.com> wrote:

> On 25/01/2013 10:58 PM, Virgil wrote:

> > In article <87ip6kvhk1.fsf@phiwumbda.org>,

> > "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@phiwumbda.org> wrote:

> >

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

> >>

> >>>> I'm not going to bother working through your addled analogy.

> >>>

> >>> You need not. Just ask yourself whether or not it is possible to

> >>> define in ZFC the set of all terminating decimal representations of

> >>> the real numbers of the unit interval. If you think that it is not

> >>> possible, then you should try to learn it. If you know it already,

> >>> then we can formally restrict ourselves to working in this set until

> >>> we discover a digit that is not defined in an element of this set.

> >>>

> >>> Your further questions then turn out meaningless.

> >>

> >> I asked how you define terminating decimal representation. How is

> >> that meaningless?

> >>

> >> Here's the definition I suggested again. Please tell me if you agree

> >> with it, and if not, what definition you have in mind.

> >>

> >> Let x be a real number in [0,1]. We say that x has a terminating

> >> decimal representation iff there is an f:N -> {0,...,9} such

> >> that

> >>

> >> x = sum_i f(i) * 10^-i,

> >>

> >> and

> >>

> >> (En)(Am > n)(f(m) = 0) or (En)(Am > n)(f(m) = 9)

> >>

> >> If x has no terminating decimal representation, then we say that x is

> >> non-terminating.

> >>

> >> We cannot continue unless I know what you mean by terminating decimal

> >> representation.

> >

> > WM finds precise careful definitions far too restricting for his

> > maunderings in Wolkenmuekenheim, so will resist either providing one

> > himself or accepting anyone else's.

>

> I suspect he is threatened by them. He cannot work through the (En) and

> (Am) notation and all that stuff, so he denies, denies, denies. He is

> all bluster, with absolutely zero understanding or hope of understanding

> even the simplest mathematical concepts.

>

> That's why he cannot let himself be pinned down by Jesse's definitions.

> He cannot understand them, so he cannot control them. He is, above all,

> a control freak.

It appears hat Jesse has finally managed to get WM to produce a concrete

definition and has used it to good advantage.

--