Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Rotwang <sg552@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:31:17 -0700
Calvin wrote:
The problem I have with all this, not knowing much
about the various theories of sets, is that some
people will make declarations, such as that there
are no infinite sets, or there are only potentially
infinite sets, as if they are speaking absolute
truths.
They don't say, along with those declarations, that
they mean 'according to this or that set theory'.
They say it as if it is revealed truth.
Those people are cranks, or in the case of the OP, pretending to be
cranks. Of course there's no reason why you should believe me and not
them when I say this, if you don't think my posts stand up on their
own (which you evidently don't). I suggest if you are serious about
wanting to understand what's going on that you read a book on
axiomatic set theory - I can personally recommend Goldrei's "Classic
Set Theory" which I quoted earlier in this thread.
Then, when
someone challenges the declarations, they start
talking about sets of axioms in various theories,
and so demonstrate their knowledge, which is
undeniable.
I haven't noticed that coming from the same people who make the kind
of declaration you talk about above.
But, in spite of high IQs, and vast and subtle
accumulated knowledge about the deepest aspects of
all known theories of sets, the fact remains that
with only limited knowledge, and only average IQ,
anyone who thinks about it at all, knows that the
totality of natural numbers is an infinite totality.
(The word 'totality' here is not used in the sense
of a sum, but in the sense of 'all'.)
If I'm forbidden from using the word 'set', so be it,
but there is an 'all' of natural numbers, and it is
infinite.
No argument from me here.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: WM
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- References:
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: WM
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Rotwang
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Virgil
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: WM
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Virgil
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Albrecht
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Don Stockbauer
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: WM
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Prev by Date: Re: JSH: Shifting world opinion
- Next by Date: Re: JSH: Shifting world opinion
- Previous by thread: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Next by thread: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|