Re: Is there a Platonistic interpretation of the empty set?
- From: "Ioannis" <morpheus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 22:14:02 +0300
Ο "Mike H" <mikeh106@xxxxxxxxxxx> έγραψε στο μήνυμα
news:1171q97s1c7ukbb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Many objects can be perceived or considered at once, and this is the
> foundation for the concept of "set." Other than a mark on paper, what,
then,
> is the empty set?
The question is very general; roughly speaking, in a Platonist
(Mathematical) "world" the empty set is the basis of everything that exists,
since using the classic construction:
{}=0,
{0}=1,
{0,1}=2,
{0,1,2}=3,
....,
one constructs the Natural numbers from it, and that's all that's really
needed to construct everything (Mathematical) that exists (in this
universe). It is like a "seed" that generates the entire universe or
alternatively, it defines the "boundary" between "existence" and
"non-existence" (in such a universe).
--
I. N. Galidakis
http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/jgal/
Eventually, _everything_ is understandable
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: convergence of functions and inverses
- Next by Date: Point in a sphere
- Previous by thread: Re: Is there a Platonistic interpretation of the empty set?
- Next by thread: Re: Is there a Platonistic interpretation of the empty set?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
