Re: logic of the Cantorian followers mind
From: Josh Purinton (google-noreply.a.jp_at_xoxy.net)
Date: 11/29/04
- Next message: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: JSH:Understanding constant terms"
- Previous message: KRamsay: "Re: Is this math test too easy?"
- In reply to: Poker Joker: "Re: logic of the Cantorian followers mind"
- Next in thread: Dave Seaman: "Re: logic of the Cantorian followers mind"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 28 Nov 2004 23:30:09 -0800
"Poker Joker" <Poker@wi.rr.com> wrote in message news:<ps7pd.91561$T02.86171@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>...
> I've been told Cantor's proof has nothing to do with computability.
Diagonalization is a powerful technique with many applications. It can be
used to show, among other things, that there are uncomputable functions
from N -> N.
> I don't find it strange that I was able to lead you here though.
The concept of computability relates to the existence of unidentifiable
real numbers insofar as there is to be an effective method for
distinguishing between identifiers.
- Next message: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: JSH:Understanding constant terms"
- Previous message: KRamsay: "Re: Is this math test too easy?"
- In reply to: Poker Joker: "Re: logic of the Cantorian followers mind"
- Next in thread: Dave Seaman: "Re: logic of the Cantorian followers mind"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|