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 � 261
Replies: 11   Last Post: May 11, 2013 7:48 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de

Posts: 16,037
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 261
Posted: May 10, 2013 3:24 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 10 Mai, 20:50, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> In article
> <693a8825-a900-4147-9b07-32e460f4f...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,


> > Every assumption of finished infinity, unnameable names, unnumerable
> > numbers, and unthinkable thoughts is wrong.

>
> At least one infinite set is necessary for both the proper definition of
> and proper execution of induction.


Fermat, Cauchy, Gauß, Kronecker never defined or executed induction
properly?

Regards, WM



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.