Re: infinity

In article <MPG.1db9db2279563eeb98a4b3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> imaginatorium@xxxxxxxxxxxxx said:
> >
> > Tony Orlow wrote:
> >
> > <snip: gosh this is repetitive>
> >
> > > Escept that, for any finite number you specify, there is always a FINITE
> > > number
> > > greater than it. This is why the largest finite can never be especified.
> > > It's
> > > larger than any finite you do specify. It's still finite.
> >
> > Right. Tony, please consider the winning move in paper-scissors-rock.
> > The winning move P one such that whatever other move X you choose, P
> > beats X.
> >
> > Um, well, problem is that whichever move you select, there is another
> > move that beats it. So does this mean that the winning move "cannot be
> > specified"? Or what?
> >
> > It seems to me that as a junior genius who is going to create something
> > to replace set theory, a good start might be a bit of a grasp on what
> > you are replacing. In normal set theory (not to say informal
> > reasoning), if positing the existence of something (the winning move in
> > scissors-paper-rock) inevitably leads to a contradiction, the usual
> > response is to say that the thing posited simply does not exist. Could
> > you compare and contrast the largest finite number with the winning
> > move in jankenpon (what it's called here)...
> >
> > Brian Chandler
> > http://imaginatorium.org
> >
> >
> Oh I dunno. Maybe that rock-paper-scissors isn't a well-ordered infinite set?

TO's mythical "largest of a set with no largest" has no more existence
than a guaranteed winning strategy at rock-scissors-paper or
tic-tac-toe.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cantors definition of set
    ... We DO specify the number 2 in math. ... Then we can define the number 1 as successor of 0: ... Now in axiomatic set theory we do not even take the number 0 "for ... mathematics, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: infinity
    ... Tony Orlow wrote: ... > larger than any finite you do specify. ... The winning move P one such that whatever other move X you choose, ... scissors-paper-rock) inevitably leads to a contradiction, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor and the binary tree
    ... >> That's all very well and good, if you specify f anf g and figure those ... Consistency of set theory is questioned, ... Each real number of is given by a path stretching over ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... We can't specify such a set with a formula of set theory, ... Therefore I showed him who obviously lacks some knowledge of basics: ... What was at issue is what is the SET THEORETIC DEFINITION of ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
    ... you insist on it for set theory. ... the standard set theory definition of 'is a function' does not ... require specifying a particular codomain. ... That does not contradict that we may specify a certain codomain in any ...
    (sci.math)