Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********
From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_sirius.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: mensanator_at_aol.compost: "Re: Surrogate factoring, out of the box"
- Previous message: Keith Ramsay: "Re: THIS STATEMENT HAS NO PROOF IN ANY SYSTEM = true or false?"
- In reply to: |-|erc: "******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Next in thread: |-|erc: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Reply: |-|erc: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 04:01:43 GMT
In sci.logic, |-|erc
<H@r.c>
wrote
on Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:12:02 +1000
<362u69F4tgn7dU1@individual.net>:
> KEEP IGNORING MY BREAKTHROUGHS SCI.MATH
> REAL SHOWMANSHIP.. NONE OF YOU HAVE ANY BALLS TO ADMIT AN ERROR
[rest of the rant snipped]
I'll just content myself to answering your question, assuming
I know precisely what it is; there are several omegas.
The simplest one is the omega associated with the ordinals.
cardinal ordinal example set
1 1st / first {0}
2 2nd / second {0,1}
3 3rd / third {0,1,2}
4 4th / fourth {0,1,2,3}
and so on.
aleph_0 omega N={0,1,2,3, ... }
For more information, consult
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/OrdinalNumber.html
-- #191, ewill3@earthlink.net It's still legal to go .sigless.
- Next message: mensanator_at_aol.compost: "Re: Surrogate factoring, out of the box"
- Previous message: Keith Ramsay: "Re: THIS STATEMENT HAS NO PROOF IN ANY SYSTEM = true or false?"
- In reply to: |-|erc: "******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Next in thread: |-|erc: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Reply: |-|erc: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]