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: Infinity: The Story So Far
Replies: 5   Last Post: Feb 28, 2014 10:20 AM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 1,968
Registered: 12/4/12
Re: Infinity: The Story So Far
Posted: Feb 28, 2014 10:20 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 2/28/2014 3:07 AM, Virgil wrote:
> In article <1b253e51-61ac-4352-bddf-75c6ffc769a0@googlegroups.com>,
> mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:

>> On Thursday, 27 February 2014 22:52:54 UTC+1, fom wrote:
>>>> The question was whether Peano defines the natural numbers. He fails.
>>> Why do you say that?
>> I say that because it is widely assumed that Peano defined the natural
>> numbers.

>
> They were around long before Peano, but he axiomatized them successfully
> to the point that we still use his axiomatizaton, at least those of us
> outside of WMytheology do.
>

>> People assume the natural numbers and find that Peano is rigth. But
>> the other way dos not work. Assuming the Peano axioms does not yield N.

>
> It produces something order-isomorphic to |N every time!.


Then WM is right.

Given your statement, the correct foundational
reduction is to study order theory and to not
make foundational claims for arithmetic.

You may use the Peano axioms without concern
for foundations. But, then you are not really
using them at all since they are mere representations
of your practice.






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.