Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Lester Zick (lesterDELzick_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 03/13/05
- Next message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Gabriel's AFD - Thread 8th March 2005"
- Previous message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: stephen_at_nomail.com: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:52:41 GMT
On 13 Mar 2005 17:44:32 GMT, stephen@nomail.com in comp.ai.philosophy
wrote:
>In sci.math Allan C Cybulskie <allan.c.cybulskie@yahoo.ca> wrote:
[. . .]
>: But I'd like to ask you to think for an instant: putting aside the example I
>: just gave WHY can't I subtract infinity from infinity? If infinity is the
>: same size or number, then it should be simple to do so. But if infinity is
>: simply a number for a large amount of various sizes or numbers, then you
>: cannot (obviously) subtract it out, but then your claim that "x + a = x" as
>: a justification of any sort for "they have the same number of elements"
>: cannot work.
>
>Why can you not divide by 0?
Technically you can if you divide 0 by 0 because then L'Hospital's
rule comes into play. But the reason you can't divide some finite
nonzero thing by zero is because division involves repetitive
subtraction and when you subtract 0 you aren't subtracting anything.
> The point is people have defined
>number systems which include an "infinity".
Actually not. People have defined number systems which include a
definition for zero as the difference between a thing and itself. The
idea of infinity is not part of any number system definition because
it just means undefined. People just like to pretend mathematical
definition is arbitrary when it is no such thing, as definitions of
zero, division by zero, and definition of infinites definitely show.
Regards - Lester
- Next message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Gabriel's AFD - Thread 8th March 2005"
- Previous message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: stephen_at_nomail.com: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|