Re: An uncountable countable set

MoeBlee wrote:
Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
Please identify something you see as incorrect or don't understand.

What's the point? People have been pointing out your incorrect
statements for years. You just sail right past every time.

So really think you are correct and that you make sense?

It must be nice.

MoeBlee


For what it's worth, and I know this doesn't add a lot of credibility to Ross in your eyes, coming from me, but I think Ross has a genuine intuition that isn't far off with respect to what's controversial in modern math. Sure, he gets repetitive and I don't agree with everything he says, but his cryptic "Well order the reals", which I actually haven't seen too much of lately, is a direct reference to his EF (Equivalence Function, yes?) between the naturals and the reals in [0,1). The reals viewed as discrete infinitesimals map to the hypernaturals, anyway, and his EF is a special case of my IFR. So, to answer your question, I think Ross makes some sense. But, of course, coming from me, that probably doesn't mean much. :)

TOE-Knee
.

Quantcast