Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- From: stevendaryl3016@xxxxxxxxx (Daryl McCullough)
- Date: 1 Nov 2005 10:13:52 -0800
Tony Orlow says...
>
>David Kastrup said:
>> An infinite number of them, yes. According to which definition does
>> that make the set finite?
>The definition that says the set is infinite iff it contains an infinity
>NUMBER of elements.
That (as usual) is defining one thing in terms of something
equally undefined. What does "number of elements" mean, in
the infinite case?
>> But that's what mathematicians are talking about when talking about
>> "infinite sets", and you have not come up with any different
>> definition. So you have no business complaining.
>
>I most certainly have said that I believe that definitions can
>start with sets or with quantities, and have offered a set with
>an infinite QUANTITY of elements as the difnition of an infinite set.
What does "quantity" mean for infinite sets?
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- From: stephen
- Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- References:
- Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- Prev by Date: Re: How do you study differential geometry?
- Next by Date: Re: Relationship between stochastic dominance and expectations
- Previous by thread: Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- Next by thread: Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
