Re: infinity
- From: Virgil <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:56:27 -0600
In article <MPG.1d6bc1c554a43a0398a0d2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> None of that erases the infinity of balls left after adding 10 and removing 1
> an infinite number of times. It's not that some fabricated last ball would
> satisfy my neurotic need for a last ball, but that your argument that the
> vase
> becomes empty makes no sense from any perspective but your wacky theory,
> which
> claims to capture some essence of infinity, and actually ignores almost every
> aspect of it.
Does TO claim that having a specific time before noon for the removal of
each specific ball is a wacky theory when it is a part of the statement
of the problem?
Which balls that are inserted into the vase before noon fail to be
removed before noon. Name one!
It is TO's wacky theory that removinga all the balls before noon leaves
some behind.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- References:
- infinity
- From: Theo Jacobs
- Re: infinity
- From: Jeroen Boschma
- Re: infinity
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: infinity
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: infinity
- From: Jeroen Boschma
- Re: infinity
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Martin Shobe
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: infinity
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- infinity
- Prev by Date: Re: Han's startling new set theory.
- Next by Date: Re: infinity
- Previous by thread: Re: infinity
- Next by thread: Re: infinity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|