Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.



Re: Matheology § 288
Posted:
Jun 21, 2013 9:35 AM


Sam Sung <no@mail.invalid> writes:
> Julio Di Egidio write: > >> "Sam Sung" <no@mail.invalid> wrote in message >> news:kq1ica$juk$1@dontemail.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



