Re: infinity

In article <MPG.1d618098e4c54cb4989fe7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Virgil said:
> > In article <MPG.1d613b9c422656a6989fde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd like to hear your response to my take on the question. I
> > > honestly can't believe that the consensus is that, if you add
> > > nine balls an infinite number of times, you get zero balls. It's
> > > nonsense.
> >
> > If they are balls labeled with consecutive natural numbers, perhaps
> > TO would be willing to give the numbers of those which are left
> > after each one of them has been removed?
> >
> If you are removing from the very first elements (1 then 2 then 3
> etc), rather that from the last ten added, then at any point, when
> removing element x, you still have added elements x+1 through element
> 10X+9. There is no point at which you have removed all elements,
> since every time you remove one, you have just added 10. This is like
> your infinite pile of dismembered fingers at the end of the infinite
> line of 1-fingered children. Even with an infinite number of
> children, there are still ten times as many fingers as children. That
> Cantorians believe otherwise is insane. Sorry.

TO really is sorry at logic. He has all these "intuitions" about what
should follow from a set of rules be like that violate the rules
themselves.

The rules for this specific situation state that we many have infinitely
balls numbered in sequence, that at each stage ten in sequence are added
and one in sequence is removed, and that this adding/removing is done
infinitely many times.

If any balls are left there must be a first one in the sequence which is
left after all these infinitely many steps are all completed, so TO
should be able to tell us what that first one is if it were to exist.

TO cannot tell us the original position number in the sequence of ANY
of those he alleges remain (however much he may fume).
>
> By the way, I didn't respond to your previous message, since it only
> consisted of baseless insults. You really need to grow up, Virgil.
> What are you, like, 10 years old?

If I were, I would be twice TO's age.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: infinity
    ... >>> Commutativity of addition can proved to hold for finite sums from the ... >> Apparently, TO knows more than Virgil about convergence, since this series is ... > limit but which, if any, balls remain after the series has ... The sum of an infinite number of terms is covered quite nicely using properties ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity
    ... >>> Apparently, TO knows more than Virgil about convergence, since ... >>> this series is neither absolutely nor conditionally convergent, ... The order in which the balls are removed from the vase is critically ... using infinite series. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity
    ... >>> Which axioms allow completion of an infinite ... That's what a sequence is, by the way: ... > If you do not interrupt the process, the vase never "reaches" noon. ... > where xis the number of balls labeled i. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: An uncountable countable set
    ... it's an infinite series of. ... the vase at, or before, noon. ... Do you think that the numbering of the balls is not relevant to ... as long as the sequence of inserting 10 and removing 1 is the same. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity
    ... >> size of the set for finite as well as infinite sets. ... How convenient, Virgil. ... >> numbered balls in a process with an infinite number of balls. ... Futures all start with dreams. ...
    (sci.math)