Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?
From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (spamtrap_at_library.lspace.org.invalid)
Date: 11/22/04
- Next message: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Previous message: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Maybe in reply to: fishfry: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Next in thread: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:37:32 -0500
In <20041118145224.702$3i@newsreader.com>, on 11/18/2004
at 07:52 PM, curt@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) said:
>We are trained like parrots to say ".2 is a number".
No. We are trained to understand what a number is, and to understand
that '.2'10, 1/5 and '.1'5 are all names for the same number, and why.
>And, because I seem not to be following my training,
No, because what you are saying is nonsense.
>Counting is a procedure.
Counting is not a number.
>I'm not saying it is wrong to call 1/5 a number. I'm saying that
>behind those words is a hidden procedure
Saying so doesn't make it true.
>..2 represents the results of dividing 1 by 5.
It also represents the result of dividing 4 by 20. Which of those
procedures is the real .2?
>The addition procedure is multiple applications of the
>counting procedure.
Please explicate the "procedure" for Pi+e.
>In the above problem, there is no counting number which we can find
>to multiply 5 by in order to produce one. So we invent a new
>notation called decimal numbers
No. We were doing fractions long before the invention of decimal
notation.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
- Next message: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Previous message: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Maybe in reply to: fishfry: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Next in thread: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|