Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent
From: Van Jacques (calccurve-test23_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/31/04
- Next message: Andrew Usher: "Re: 'Uncountable' doesn't exist"
- Previous message: Dik T. Winter: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- In reply to: Virgil: "Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent"
- Next in thread: Dik T. Winter: "Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 30 Jul 2004 19:24:00 -0700
I think that this desire to reject formal math (with precise defs. that
allow one to make progress in understanding difficult and even
counterintuitive ideas), in favor of a return to the fuzzy ideas
where one just sort of asserts things as being "common sense", is
at the bottom of these absurd claims one often sees posted here.
(Like the idea that N is bigger than E.)
Van
Virgil wrote:
> In article <2cf2d21.0407292141.6b906591@posting.google.com>,
> david.ferguson1@cox.net (David P. Ferguson) wrote:
>
> > "Dik T. Winter" <Dik.Winter@cwi.nl> wrote in message
> > news:<I1LBI7.CIp@cwi.nl>...
> > > In article <2cf2d21.0407281543.56099b81@posting.google.com>
> > > david.ferguson1@cox.net (David P. Ferguson) writes:
[snip]
- Next message: Andrew Usher: "Re: 'Uncountable' doesn't exist"
- Previous message: Dik T. Winter: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- In reply to: Virgil: "Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent"
- Next in thread: Dik T. Winter: "Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
