Re: infinity

Jonathan Hoyle said:
> >> Exactly. What you have not proven is that it is true when there
> >> is no finite size limitation. You assume it without proof (because
> >> frankly, it's improvable). Once again, your hidden assumption
> >> circles back into your "proof".
> >
> > It is NOT true that the set is finite without the finite size limitation.
> > That is the point.
>
> That may be the point, but it's a point you never prove. You prove it
> when there is a finite size limitation, and then you wave your hands
> and say it's true without the limitation. Hand waving is not proof.
> Yes, I know, you've proven it for the finite size limitation. That's
> not the part you need to prove. It's the part that applies to all
> finite strings **without** size limitation.
Uh, do you expect me to prove that the set of all strings, finite and infinite,
is finite? It's not. I don't know what you want. No matter what finite size you
have, the set of strings is always finite. That's what was proven.
>
>
> >> If it's unbounded, how can you claim that it's finite?
> >
> > Because it has a finite value range...
> <snip>
>
> Here we go with the circular reasoning again. This is part of what you
> are trying to prove, Tony. You can't use it to prove it. Using the
> conclusion as part of your proof is tautology (a type of invalid
> argument). "I'm God and I can prove it: God doesn't lie, and since I'm
> God, I therefore must be telling the truth about being God." It's
> persuasive only to people who already believe it (and of course, those
> are not the people who need persuading). Basic logic, man.
So, you're God? Wow! I never thought I'd meet you in a place like this. Gee,
talking with God about infinity! I hope I'm not going to hell for this! I'm
not, am I Jonathan, uh, I mean, God? Please? I'm sorry. Please don't send me to
hell. Pleeeease!

My reasoning is not circular, O Infinite One, and if you continue to say that,
then that continuation consititutes the main circularity of the discussion.

Watch carefully:

All finite values -> all finite differences -> finite value range

Can you please point out the implication that points back to the beginning and
causes a circle? Can you identify which of those two linear implications you
disagree with?
>
> This is why mathematicians do not agree with you. (Does it not bother
> you that people trained in the field you are trying to talk about, are
> unilaterally disagreeing with you?)

No, it doesn't bother me for my sake that you disagree with me because you see
circles that aren't there. It also doesn't make me feel bad for me that cops
don't understand keeping peace, doctors don't understand health, lawyers don't
understand justice, and politicians don't understand the role of law. It just
sucks for the world at large.
>
>

--
Smiles,

Tony
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Who Is Jesus Father in Mortality?
    ... god must approve of incest. ... limitation. ... Church astray or do you not believe the words of the prophet? ...
    (soc.religion.mormon)
  • Re: infinity
    ... > It is NOT true that the set is finite without the finite size limitation. ... Hand waving is not proof. ... "I'm God and I can prove it: God doesn't lie, ... are not the people who need persuading). ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Who Is Jesus Father in Mortality?
    ... god must approve of incest. ... limitation. ...
    (soc.religion.mormon)
  • Re: Petersons Death Sentence
    ... >> limitation on god? ... It's just seeing it god is consistent with logic. ... postulating something that is totally outwith all current physics, ... outwith physics state of affairs is actually required to explain any ...
    (comp.os.linux.networking)
  • Re: Petersons Death Sentence
    ... >> limitation on god? ... It's just seeing it god is consistent with logic. ... postulating something that is totally outwith all current physics, ... outwith physics state of affairs is actually required to explain any ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
Quantcast