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.independent

Topic: Matheology § 288
Replies: 7   Last Post: Jun 21, 2013 11:07 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Alan Smaill

Posts: 757
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 288
Posted: Jun 21, 2013 9:35 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Sam Sung <no@mail.invalid> writes:

> Julio Di Egidio write:
>

>> "Sam Sung" <no@mail.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:kq1ica$juk$1@dont-email.me...

>>> Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>>>

>>>> << Edward Nelson criticizes the classical conception of natural numbers
>>>> because of the circularity of its definition. In classical mathematics
>>>> the
>>>> natural numbers are defined as 0 and numbers obtained by the iterative
>>>> applications of the successor function to 0. But the concept of natural
>>>> number is already assumed for the iteration. >>
>>>>
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrafinitism#Main_ideas>

>>>
>>> So what?

>>
>> You have snipped the context.

>
> You refer to:
>

>>> What does pi count?
>>> Isn't it a number?

>>
>> pi counts pi, of course...

>
> ? Sorry then.


What's the relevance of the context?
I still don't know what pi is supposed to be counting, pi amount of what?
And Nelson's comments are specifically about natural numbers.



--
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.