Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: "Peter Webb" <webbfamily@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:40:10 +1000
"Calvin" <crice5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1184128984.065260.91660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 11, 12:26 am, Proginoskes <CCHeck...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:THE ONLY SETS WHICH EXIST ARE FINITE SETS. THE INFINITE IS ONLY A
PRODUCT OF THE IMAGINATION.
Then what is the largest natural number?
I can't see that restricting set theory to finite sets means there has to be a largest natural number.
So N isn't a set; big deal, nothing breaks. ZFC doesn't have the set of all ordinals, nobody seems to care.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- References:
- Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Prev by Date: Secondary ellipsoid parmentation
- Next by Date: Magic square and linear algebra
- Previous by thread: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Next by thread: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Index(es):