The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology § 108
Replies: 12   Last Post: Oct 4, 2012 9:57 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 488
Registered: 7/4/05
Re: Matheology � 108
Posted: Oct 3, 2012 3:47 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Uirgil wrote:

> In article
> <>,
> WM <> wrote:

>> Matheology ? 108
>> The main part of the paper is devoted to show that the real numbers
>> are denumerable. The explicit denumerable sequence that contains all
>> real numbers will be given. The general element that generates the
>> sequence will be written as well as the first few elements of that
>> sequence. That there is one-to-one correspondence between the real
>> numbers and the elements of the explicitly written sequence will be
>> proven by the three independent proofs. [...] It is also proven that
>> the Cantor?s 1873 proof of non denumerability is not correct since it
>> implicates non denumerability of rational numbers. In addition it is
>> proven that the numbers generated by the
>> diagonal procedure in Cantor?s 1891 proof are not different from the
>> numbers in the assumed denumerable set.
>> [Slavica Vlahovica and Branislav Vlahovic: "Countability of the Real
>> Numbers"]
>> arXiv:math.NT/0403169 v1 10 Mar 2004

> While I have not yet analysed their alleged proof, I find that at least
> one of their counterarguments to Cantors first proof to be flawed.
> And I have no doubt that WM will soon post references to papers in
> which someone has trisected an arbitrary angle, squared a circle and
> duplicated a cube.

While a trisector will not solve the problem he asserts to solve, he may and
in some cases does provide approximate solutions which are quite clever. A
trisector's work may have mathematical content and should not be mixed up
with Mückenheim's totally clueless and idiotic scrap.


Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.