Date: Feb 28, 2013 10:21 PM
Author: namducnguyen
Subject: Re: Matheology ? 222 Back to the roots

On 28/02/2013 7:51 PM, Virgil wrote:
> In article <khUXs.345339$pV4.177097@newsfe21.iad>,
> Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@shaw.ca> wrote:
>

>> On 28/02/2013 8:27 AM, Frederick Williams wrote:
>>> Nam Nguyen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 27/02/2013 10:12 PM, Virgil wrote:

>>>>> In article <R8AXs.345282$pV4.85998@newsfe21.iad>,
>>>
>>>>> The set of all functions from |N = {0,1,2,3,...} to {0,1,2,...,9} with
>>>>> each f interpreted as Sum _(i in |N) f(i)/10^1, defines such a
>>>>> structure..

>>>>
>>>> That doesn't look like a structure to me. Could you put all what
>>>> you've said above into a form using the notations of a structure?

>>>
>>> There is a set and a collection of functions on it. How does it fail to
>>> be a structure?

>>
>> From what textbook did you learn that a structure is defined as
>> "a set and a collection of functions on it"?

>
> Then give us your textbook definition of structure and show why the
> above fails to meet it.


Shoenfield, Section 2.5 "Structures". One reason the above fails is,
you don't define, construct, the predicate (set) for the symbol '^'.

And that's just 1 reason amongst others. Do you admit it now that
the above fails to meet the requirements of a language structure?


--
----------------------------------------------------
There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.

NYOGEN SENZAKI
----------------------------------------------------