Re: OT: An observation


Robert Kolker wrote:
> I have observed that as many people on this NG gag on Cantorian set
> theory as there are gaggers on sci.physics.relativity who cannot
accept
> Einstein's theories. What do you suppose is happening? Why is it so?
>
> It is not like either Canntor's transfinite numbers or Einstien's
> relativity theories are new (Special Relativity is 100 years old this

> year). Both thoeries have been gone over in great detail by competent

> people and if anything were amiss it would have been found by now.
>
> Almost all the anti-Cantorians I have seen on this NG simply cannot
> accept the notion of an infinite set as a complete entity. Why do you

> suppose that is?
>
> Bob Kolker

One interesting thing is that I gather from various sources that
historically, the forerunners of today's cranks were pre-occupied with
'classical' problems such as squaring the circle, doubling the cube,
and so on. Now, unless I am mistaken and there is still a thriving
industry in angle-trisection, the relevant mathematical proofs of
impossibility have silenced *those* crankishnesses.

Why does the crank _gestalt_ accept those proofs, but not Einstein and
Cantor?

Why do Maxwell's equations never take any flak? Why does the
Banach-Tarski paradox go unmentioned? The Four Colour Theorem and its
is-it-a-proof? The oh-my-god-this-proof-is-too-long of Kepler's
Conjecture? So many truly surprising and controversial results, yet
what do we get day in day out? Crazy Herc. Every day.

It's a mystery.

--
Larry Lard
Replies to group please

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: An observation
    ... Robert Kolker wrote: ... > I have observed that as many people on this NG gag on Cantorian set ... > relativity theories are new (Special Relativity is 100 years old this ... basement so the only way to refute cranks is by appeal to authority. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: OT: An observation
    ... Robert Kolker wrote: ... > I have observed that as many people on this NG gag on Cantorian set ... > relativity theories are new (Special Relativity is 100 years old this ... everyone is under the impression of understanding it. ...
    (sci.math)