Re: Problems I have with 1.999...=2

On 10 May 2005 01:39:20 -0700, Hero wrote:
> The empty set is a set of numbers ? After all, following Your
> reasoning, it is the set of all surreal numbers and of all
> infinitesimal numbers. The calculus of these numbers is like a game
> with indifferent kinds of nothings.

Every member of the empty set is a number.

By the way, there is no "set of all surreal numbers". No set is big
enough to contain them all. And no, that does not mean that "the set of
all surreal numbers" is the empty set, but it does mean that the set of
all sets containing all the surreal numbers is the empty set.



--
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GBA - Whats the big deal?
    ... >>> Good job the lock on feature lets you do just that then! ... We are all talking about the same game here aren't we? ... is the empty set. ...
    (uk.games.video.misc)
  • Re: Problems I have with 1.999...=2
    ... The empty set is a set of numbers? ... reasoning, it is the set of all surreal numbers and of all ... It'll not blow any one's mind, may be the mind implodes like a vacuum ... Prev by Date: ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Vacuously true statements
    ... Arturo Magidin wrote: ... empty set is subset of any set, ... is the following reasoning wrong? ... David Marcus ...
    (sci.math)