Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Virgil <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:35:02 -0600
In article <1121765985.427135.12210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>
> Virgil wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Which infinity is a number according to Cantor? There are all sorts of
> > infinities, and they need not all be numbers.
> >
> Every kind of actual infinity is a number by Cantor
Then we have progressed well beyond Cantor in the last century, since we
are no longer as limited as you claim he was.
.
- References:
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: *** T. Winter
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: Virgil
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Relative Cardinality
- Prev by Date: Re: Relative Cardinality
- Next by Date: Re: Square roots - decimal expansions --
- Previous by thread: Re: Relative Cardinality
- Next by thread: Re: Relative Cardinality
- Index(es):