Re: infinity
- From: Virgil <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:45:17 -0600
In article <MPG.1d7fdc9ecd0315ec98a1c1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Do you agree that when I add a character to a finite
> > string, I still have a finite string?
> yes, when you add a finite number of characters to a finite number of
> characters the sum is finite. If I can do this forever without bound, then I
> can add an infinite number of characters, and the string is no longer finite.
Since this adding of one character is done one character at a time,
which character addition takes it from a finite string to an to infinite
one?
In the same way, adding one recursively to a finite natural must at some
recursive step make the result infinite if there are to be any infinite
naturals at all.
But TO also ignores the proof that the set of finite naturals is
Cantor-infinite.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- References:
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- Prev by Date: Re: How Were Those Tables Computed?
- Next by Date: Re: How Were Those Tables Computed?
- Previous by thread: Re: infinity
- Next by thread: Re: infinity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|