Re: infinity

David R Tribble said:
> Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
> > What consistency! What was the contradiction in the notion that [0,1) is
> > half the size of [0,2) again?
>
> If you're right, you should be able to name twice as many points
> from [0,2) than I can name from [0,1).
>
> But while you can name two points in [0,2) for every point I choose
> in [0,1), I can also name two points in [0,1) for every point you
> choose in [0,2).
>
> b = a x 2, for all a in [0,1)
> and b in [0,2)
>
> c = d / 2, for all d in [0,2)
> and c in [0,1)
>
>
Your mapping function demonstrates the ratio of 2 between these two sets of
reals.
--
Smiles,

Tony
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: infinity
    ... >> Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote: ... >> David R Tribble said: ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... Wolf Kirchmeir said: ... > Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote: ... >> I see no contradiction. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... Wolf Kirchmeir said: ... > Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote: ... >> I see no contradiction. ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... Wolf Kirchmeir said: ... > Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote: ... >> I see no contradiction. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: infinity
    ... >> Tony Orlow wrote: ... >>> The proof derives a contradiction from assuming some completed set and ... there is no contradiction in mappings involving all elements of ... y is by definition an element of the set we are trying to map. ...
    (sci.math)
Loading