Re: A summary of my position so far.

Herbert Newman wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 19:22:02 -0800 (PST) Mitch Harris wrote:

- whatever JJ is doing, your response was, well, was sorta bizarre in
its own way.

I'd call it appropriate. Enough is enough!

On the other hand, David C. Ullrich actually DID present an "excellent
summary" of things JJ stated: equally incomprehensible. :-)

Finally, I'd like to indicate that digits and symbols, as numbers,
are not necessarily odd or even, finite or infinite, discrete or
non-discrete, ordered or not ordered. Whether such descriptions are of
properties which arise as a consequence of digits being expressed in
particular applications (such as a sequence or calculus), or whether
these are not properties but instead refer to stand-alone ontological
elements I have not entirely determined. But logically it looks like the
latter. For, regarding the former, we note that there is no substantive
description of an element that is distinguishable from its properties;
which would seem to rule this option out.


Herb

It may not be easy but it's not hard. No-one seems to want to read slowly - look:

I said
"there is no substantive description of an element that is distinguishable from its properties"

Right. First we slow down. It means that

1) "there is no substantive description of an element"
means that we cannot describe the properties of something (an "element")
2) "that is distinguishable from its properties"
if we treat properties as being separate ("distinguishable") from the something that has these properties.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: bijection of R: R <--> Rx.....xR
    ... >> on philosophical grounds: Although it turns out it doesn't ... >> terms of the decimal digits. ... >> David C. Ullrich ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: ANSWER THE FCKING QUESTION GHOST
    ... "David C. Ullrich" wrote in message ... Remember how you said irrationals are perfect and rationals are real life approximations? ... It seems a few hundred digits was close enough for Planck and crew after all. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: ANSWER THE FCKING QUESTION GHOST
    ... "David C. Ullrich" wrote in message ... Remember how you said irrationals are perfect and rationals are real life approximations? ... It seems a few hundred digits was close enough for Planck and crew after all. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: What are the odds of guessing a number between 1 and 20 digits long?
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote: ... between 1 and 20 digits then your chance of guessing ... social security number, for example, which is nine digits long. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: on-line calculator
    ... David W. Cantrell wrote: ...
    (sci.math)