Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


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

Topic: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Replies: 2   Last Post: Jan 4, 2013 2:37 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Zaljohar@gmail.com

Posts: 2,665
Registered: 6/29/07
Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted: Jan 4, 2013 2:37 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jan 4, 8:13 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:
> Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Dear fom I'm not against Uncountability, I'm not against Cantor's
> > argument. I'm saying that Cantor's argument is CORRECT. All what I'm
> > saying is that it is COUNTER-INTUITIVE as it violates the
> > Distinguishability argument which is an argument that comes from
> > intuition excerised in the FINITE world. That's all.

>
> But you've neither explained the meaning of your second premise nor
> given any indication why it is plausible.
>

I did but you just missed it.

My second premise is that finite distinguishability is countable.

What I meant by that is that we can only have countably many
distinguishable finite initial segments of reals. And this has already
been proved. There is no plausibility here, this is a matter that is
agreed upon.

Zuhair
> --
> Jesse F. Hughes
>
> "How lucky we are to be able to hear how miserable Willie Nelson could
> imagine himself to be." -- Ken Tucker on Fresh Air





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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.