Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Allan C Cybulskie (allan.c.cybulskie_at_yahoo.ca)
Date: 03/22/05
- Next message: Dave Seaman: "Re: Distinct linear orderings on Z"
- Previous message: stephen_at_nomail.com: "Re: Turing machines, quantum computers, and alephs"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:23:53 -0500
"robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:3a9aiuF69hi1lU1@individual.net...
>
>
> Allan C Cybulskie wrote:
> >
> > You cannot take "relative number" out of the phrase "relative number of
> > elements". What the phrase means as a whole is the number of elements
in
> > the sets relative to each other's number of elements, even if the exact
> > number of elements is not known/knowable (ie that whatever the number of
> > elements in the one set is, the other set has a constant number relative
to
> > that).
>
> What does the phrase "relative to each other's number of elements" mean?
For any N, the number of elements in one will be X while the other will be X
+ another number.
- Next message: Dave Seaman: "Re: Distinct linear orderings on Z"
- Previous message: stephen_at_nomail.com: "Re: Turing machines, quantum computers, and alephs"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]