Re: About pii and integers
From: David Kastrup (dak_at_gnu.org)
Date: 10/04/04
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Previous message: pierre.c: "Re: T1 topology"
- In reply to: Will Twentyman: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 16:01:22 +0200
Will Twentyman <wtwentyman@read.my.sig> writes:
> There is nothing inconsistent about working with a set such as
> {1,2,3,4}. However, such a set is *not* the natural numbers. The
> point of the Peano Axioms is to construct the natural numbers, not a
> subset of the natural numbers.
Wrong. The point of the Peano axioms is to _define_ the natural
numbers. There is no "construction" implied anywhere, nor the
possibility of it.
-- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Previous message: pierre.c: "Re: T1 topology"
- In reply to: Will Twentyman: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]