Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- From: matthias@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 29 Jan 2006 17:55:59 -0800
E. E. Escultura
>Am still waiting for that contradiction that you claimed to have found in my work
You haven't given nearly enough detail for anyone to find a
contradiction.* Please:
1. List your axioms explicitly. Start with a list of the undefined
notions, then give a formal statement of each of the axioms.
2. Say exactly what criteria you require to show that something which
is not an axiom is provable from your axioms.
* Here is an example. You define your real numbers to be the
completion of a certain initial set. You claim that the sequence
1,0.1,0.001, 0.001 does not converge to 0. But in the ordinary sense
of the word completion that sequence certainly converges to 0. You do
not define what you mean by ``completion'' and so it is impossible to
show that you are wrong. But that isn't because you are correct, it is
only because you have failed to define what you mean by completion. In
every previous constructive analysis (such as Bishop, Brouwer, etc.,.)
the sequence above is believed to converge to 0.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- From: E. E. Escultura
- Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- From: Virgil
- Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- References:
- Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- From: Robert J. Kolker
- Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- From: E. E. Escultura
- Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- Prev by Date: Re: Composite Congruency Example
- Next by Date: Hexpentaquaternions: a two-hand quaternion algebra
- Previous by thread: Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- Next by thread: Re: Contradicrtion-free mathemattics (The new nonstandard analysis
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading