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: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory
Replies: 15   Last Post: Jan 22, 2014 7:58 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: 13,482
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory
Posted: Jan 22, 2014 8:20 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Wednesday, 22 January 2014 13:57:37 UTC+1, Port563 wrote:
> <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote...
>

> > a potential list is never completed such that you can never say anything
>
> > for all integers. This is tantamount that you cannot exclude anything
>
> > and say that no integer of the list can satisfy the requirement of a
>
> > certain proof.
>
>
>
> By analogy, therefore, at the other end of the scale, in your mathematics
>
> a point cannot exist, as it has no dimensions which means everything is
>
> excluded.


If a point has co-ordinates, it exists - like every finite or finitely defined potentially infinite list.
>
>
>
> If there's no point, then instead of this trolling garbage why don't you
>
> participate in sensible discussion and work, e.g., ""Good" primes -
>
> conjectures and results",



My time is limited. So I choose what I consider the most important topic.


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.