Re: There are uncountably many irrationals

From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 01/12/05 

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:55:41 -0600

On 12 Jan 2005 13:29:50 +0100, Torkel Franzen <torkel@sm.luth.se>
wrote:

>David C. Ullrich <ullrich@math.okstate.edu> writes:
>
>> Let S = {3, 4}. How many elements does S have? Two. Are any
>> of the elements of S two? No. Is this a contradiction? No.
>> Now what's the difference between this example and your
>> absurdity above?
>
>Come on, you've been around long enough. Wolfgang Mückenheim is a
>classic crank. Why do you imagine, as you seem to do, that there is
>any point arguing with him?

Just boredom. The idea that N being infinite implies it must
contain infinite elements is fairly standard around here, and
it occurred to me that it might be amusing to see what M
said about the previous paragraph (or whether he decided
to simply ignore it.)

I wonder if the problem has something to do with the sort
of execrable English one sometimes sees around here, where
people do say "N contains infinite elements" _meaning_
that it contains infinitely many elements...

>It may seem odd that he has a job as
>a professor in technical and mathematical subjects, but such things
>happen. H M Hubey is or was also a professor.

************************

David C. Ullrich