Re: Different size infinities?
From: Ross A. Finlayson (raf_at_tiki-lounge.com)
Date: 11/05/04
- Next message: Torkel Franzen: "Re: Zenkin's paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)"
- Previous message: nightbat: "Re: suppressing other peoples website from appearing in Google"
- In reply to: Robin Chapman: "Re: Different size infinities?"
- Next in thread: Han de Bruijn: "Re: Different size infinities?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 5 Nov 2004 00:15:17 -0800
Robin Chapman <rjc@ivorynospamtower.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cmdng7$a0i$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>...
> Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>
> > I think Clive Barker is an excellent novelist.
>
> Doo you prefer his recent stuff like _Arbarat_ or
> his early stuff like _Books of Blood_.
> And what about his efforts at direction?
I'm looking at his bibliography. I read "Weaveworld", with the Rub al
Khali, the Empty Quarter, where Barker had Eden, "The Great and Secret
Show", "Imajica", some of the other books in that series, it's been
quite a few years. I've read a bunch of those Stephen King novels,
one of them made me cry, when Wolf died.
Novelists are a barometer, I haven't read more than ten thousand
novels, yet probably more than a thousand, few more, probably less
than two thousand, some have. Some novels can be read in a day, it is
a disservice, but there are many novels and few days. That might be
shallow comprehension. I was one of those insipid young science
fiction readers who didn't care for pulp except Edgar Rice Burroughs'
Barsoom, and even PJF's ancient world book. I remember getting a
Tarzan novel when I was eleven or so and it was too thick for me, the
prose was too dense for me to read. I was able to handle it later,
from reading _everything_. from cereal boxes in the morning to
paperbacks late at night. I read more than thirty Oz books as a
youngster with a library card, leading to a lifelong fascination with
sci-fi.
That's just namedropping and serves me no purpose. Herbert's Dune and
other works, for example with the highlighters, some of Niven's Known
Universe, Anthony's variety, much of it, Irving, some few classics,
sure, lots of people read those, they're popular, accessible novels.
I look around the room for novels. I'm embarrassed because there's a
Koontz book, I only have a few hundred, most of them are put away.
The hundred books I can see are non-fiction and mostly technical, I've
read much of them, but I haven't leafed and scanned through each page
of the CRC. I like used book stores, too many books are always
shelved. I read some of those vampire books, Anne Rice etcetera,
Umberto Eco, some of the romanticists, I read George Lucas' "Star
Wars" novels, but only "Star Wars", etcetera, the little cardboard
boxed set, before the days of pulp Star Wars and Star Trek novels.
Cussler, MacLean, Crichton, Clancy, Fleming, Blume, L'Amour, pulp, a
hundred of them, what kind of junk is that? Hell, I've even read
twenty Michener books. I read the Silmarillion one time, having
started five or ten times, it's just not there for the unmotivated
reader, I read Two Towers dozens or scores of times. and that's an
excellent movie.
Reading can be damn easier than writing. It's also a prerequisite. A
couple weeks ago I felled a tree sixty foot high and four feet
through, bigger than you can hug. I can type accurately at a steady
clip of sixty words per minute, I've seen a guy extendedly typing
ninety before. I'm not a good story-teller.
I almost forgot Asimov, an historically innovative novelist, although
perhaps the plot device of psychohistory is prophecy. Then again, if
I was callous I would be almost Jesuitical, but I'm multisectarian,
and steeped in Eastern pseudo-philosophy.
Now that I've pumped myself up about being a thinker, tqhis thread is
about "Different Sizes of Infinities." We can measure and compare a
wide variety of different infinite sets, with a variety of methods.
Do you agree?
What do you make of the informal proof that any pair of infinite sets
upon which you can impose an ordering have a one to one pairing of
their elements in order? I call a similar notion the "canonical
ordering interjections proof", but that's more about using set theory
for arithmetic, the notion of the interjection within the number
system is that it s used to represent specific fractions of one set
compared to another instead of yes/no, for infinite and finite sets,
for a more simple mechanism for deriving number theory's density from
set theory.
Robin, can Mssrs. Borel and Combinatorics not agree? Are there not
only real numbers between zero and one? Do not you agree that the
range of EF is the unit interval?
Do you find mathematics in these fictionalist novelists' works?
Warm regards,
Ross F.
- Next message: Torkel Franzen: "Re: Zenkin's paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)"
- Previous message: nightbat: "Re: suppressing other peoples website from appearing in Google"
- In reply to: Robin Chapman: "Re: Different size infinities?"
- Next in thread: Han de Bruijn: "Re: Different size infinities?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
