Re: Godel proved maths inconsistent not incompleteness theorem

Charlie-Boo <shymathguy@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

On Mar 13, 5:08 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Mar 13, 3:43 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Mar 13, 2:53 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
I give a cardinality of aleph-0 to finite sets, but whatever numbers
you want is fine with me - like whether Peano starts with 0 or 1.

So all finite sets have the same cardinality, namely aleph-0?

On the infinity scale viz. finite.

It all has to do with loops in computer programs, you know - how many
loops it takes to process the finite subset of the world that man will
ever see.

I asked a yes/no question.  

I gave an implicit yes.

If you say so.  Okay, so every finite set has the same cardinality.
Well, that *is* revolutionary.

No, I said with respect to the infinity scale. There is no point to
any of this, you do realize that don't you?

I don't know what that means, but I do know that you said that you
said "yes" to my question. My question was:

[Do] all finite sets have the same cardinality, namely aleph-0?

A "yes" to this seems to justify the following conclusion:

Every finite set has the same cardinality.

And now you say that this conclusion is wrong. Did you want to
retract the earlier "yes"?

I've never seen any hint that CBL has a definition of cardinality.

I thought you just quoted it.

I quoted no definition at all. I asked a simple question, the
affirmation of which would not serve as a definition of cardinality.
At best, it may serve as a definition of aleph-0.

You *do* know what a definition is, right? Here, I'll get you
started:

Let X and Y be sets. We say that X and Y have the same
/cardinality/ just in case ...

(Hint: don't answer "yes" to this one. It's fill-in-the-blank.)

--
"[In the movie, Tom Green] delivers a child, severs the umbilicus with
his teeth and then swings the baby over his head before tenderly
handing it to the stunned, blood-spattered mother[...] This was, I
have to say, a bit much." -- New York Times movie reviewer A. O. Scott
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: fastest way to print a lot of pdf files?
    ... >> within a classic system of mathematics like the one you have in mind, ... > indicates you don't know what cardinality means, ... > array of a finite set of symbols and the integers. ... Now tell me how they create that bijection of yours- indeed, ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • countability of reals
    ... A one-to-one correspondence can be set up between the set IQ ... X_n is a finite set. ... transfinite induction is not required. ... The cardinality of IX is not larger than ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Extrapolating linear ratios
    ... Every FINITE set, dumbass. ... Obviously infinite sets of naturals do not contain ANY numbers larger ... than the cardinality of the set, since the cardinality of the set is ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: abundance of irrationals!)
    ... > Franziska Neugebauer wrote: ... >>> does not state anything about the cardinality of the set. ... >>> for any finite set, because we dobt the existence of infinite sets. ... >> of red apples. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Godel proved maths inconsistent not incompleteness theorem
    ...   Every finite set has the same cardinality. ... You left out "in CBL". ... affirmation of which would not serve as a definition of cardinality. ... it may serve as a definition of aleph-0. ...
    (sci.logic)
Loading