A new definition of natural numbers
- From: "kunzmilan" <kunzmilan@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: 3 Nov 2006 00:51:23 -0800
Many long discussions in this group lead to the conclusion, that it is
necessary to define anew what is a natural number. I propose this:
A natural number is a number which has its own name in form of a numeral in a natural language (for example English).Therefore, infinity is not a natural number, since it is from its
nature indefinite, as numerals some or many are.
It can be discussed, if mathematical expressions for large numbers
belong to natural languages or or if they form an artificial language,
as Esperanto or computer languages are.
Physicists must precise in next hundreds years the definition of the
Avogadro number. Otherwise, it can not keep its status of the natural
number.
kunzmilan
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A new definition of natural numbers
- From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
- Re: A new definition of natural numbers
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: A new definition of natural numbers
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: A new definition of natural numbers
- From: Jon Slaughter
- Re: A new definition of natural numbers
- Prev by Date: Re: Distance between a point and y = ax^2 + bx + c
- Next by Date: Re: FLTMA: Finitely Generated Abelian Groups
- Previous by thread: Irrationals and nowhere dense
- Next by thread: Re: A new definition of natural numbers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
