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: Matheology § 258
Replies: 1   Last Post: May 3, 2013 3:09 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View  
Alan Smaill

Posts: 757
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 258
Posted: May 3, 2013 3:09 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

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

> No, that is a contradiction. First the set of natural numbers has
> cardinality aleph_0. Therefore it is actually infinite.

...

> Second the naturals are used to index the digits of the decimals. For
> that sake they are required to be actually infinite.


See your confusion revealed again:
the claim is that there is an infinite set.

There is no separate claim that "they" are required to be actually
infinite: you're revealing your underlying belief that classical
maths involves some mystical infinite natural numbers.

If you want to show the classical position is self-contradictory,
you should do as Russell did, and start from principles accepted
by current standard maths, and produce a proof from that.


>
> Regards, WM


--
Alan Smaill




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.