Re: Cantor's Theory sucks

Robert Kolker said:
> Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
>
> >
> > Even "pure" mathematic should have SOME justification for its axioms. Induction
> > is as much a part of logic as deduction. This imbalance is taking its toll.
>
> you mean, it should have a -use-. It turns out that most interesting and
> beautiful mathematical systems have been developed to encapsulate
> intuitions about the physical world. I think mathematics is often
> nourished by the real world, but mathematics -as such- as no emprical
> content.
>
> Bob Kolker
>
>
True, math is an abstraction from reality. It should be applicable to reality.
If it is finally applied to reality, it either works, or it doesn't, and if the
latter is the case, then some assumption was wrong somewhere along the line. Do
you think it unimportant to find the cuplrit?
--
Smiles,

Tony
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Orlow cardinality question
    ... Robert Kolker said: ... > Tony Orlow wrote: ... >>>based on the very mathematics you tell us cannot work. ... as if Cantor was the last word. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: a question for the anti-Cantorians
    ... Robert Kolker said: ... > Tony Orlow wrote: ... >> will always have trouble being applied to reality. ... arguing that science isn't the fruit of mathematics. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor and the binary tree
    ... > Tony Orlow wrote: ... since mathematics is the science of quantity ... with them to make sure their generalizations apply to all sets, ... Newtonian physics yields to realtivity, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Well Ordering the Reals
    ... >> Tony Orlow says... ... Remind us of your "explicit" definition of finite. ... If you were capable of doing mathematics, ... naturals to finite values". ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Galileos Paradox
    ... Virgil wrote: ... Tony Orlow wrote: ... What TO wants, TO has repeatedly shown that he not have the capacity to get, at least in mathematics. ... Dude, ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast