Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:41:59 -0600
In article <1173957371.390948.256640@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 12 Mrz., 22:11, Tony Orlow <t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
mueck...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
If you take into account the physical restrictions, then there is no
infinite set. And that is the only correct approach.
Maybe in physics, but not in mathematics which does not concede physical
limitations to non-physical ideas.
WM's position is that that we can't even talk about Pegasus intil after
someone has bred a flying horse.
Regards, WM
Well, since numbers are not physical entities, they don't actually
occupy space on the number line - they are true points. So, between any
two finitely distant points are indeed some infinite number of points.
You say that the only correct approach is to take into account
"physical" restrictions, but where the subject is non-physical, those
restrictions don't exist, though relations do, even if between infinite
nonphysical concepts called numbers.
The subject may be non-physical (it is not).
When WM can produce a physical model which reproduces ALL of those
properties of mathematical triangles which have been common knowledge
since Euclid, only then may he claim that mathematics is physical.
.
- References:
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: William Hughes
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: William Hughes
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: William Hughes
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Prev by Date: Hopf bundle is non trivial
- Next by Date: Re: My Simple Attempted Proof On Fermat's Last Theorem
- Previous by thread: Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Next by thread: Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|