Re: Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- From: Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:28:25 -0600
In article <274f$46d3ce98$82a1e228$9824@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Virgil wrote:
In article <1188234041.674074.164650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
david petry <david_lawrence_petry@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 25, 11:06 am, "T.H. Ray" <thray...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Stop abusing Weyl with your tendentious cherrypicked
quotes.
Weyl seemed to be something of a flip-flopper on the foundations of
mathematics. I don't think I'm abusing him.
The early developers of anything new in mathematics (as in many other
fields) sometimes have troubles finding their way, and the true path
only becomes clear to those following later when most, if not all, of
the dead ends and false trails have been eliminated.
Sure. And that true path is yours, of course.
Kind of you to suggest it, but no, it is not mine, though I seem better
able to follow it than you do. Perhaps it is because I do not try to
force it to be what it is not.
.
Han de Bruijn
- References:
- Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- From: david petry
- Re: Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- From: T.H. Ray
- Re: Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- From: david petry
- Re: Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- From: Virgil
- Re: Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- Prev by Date: Re: math is a physical process
- Next by Date: Re: Does a potential infinity actually exist?
- Previous by thread: Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- Next by thread: Re: after fermat's last theorem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|