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 § 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: 1,103
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$juk$

>>> 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. >>
>>>> <>

>>> 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]

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