Re: Two results of set geometry

On 19 Sep., 19:42, MoeBlee <jazzm...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

It doesn't get much simpler: N is omega.

That is nonsense --- it is at least a matter of definition or a
theorem and as such a matter of proof.

N is usually understood as an abbreviation for the set of natural
numbers.
*If* this set has an ordinal number, then it may be called omega.
If this set has a cardinal number, then it may be called omega.

Regards, WM

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Two results of set geometry
    ... That is nonsense --- it is at least a matter of definition or a ... theorem and as such a matter of proof. ... N is usually understood as an abbreviation for the set of natural ... If this set has a cardinal number, then it may be called omega. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Two results of set geometry
    ... That is nonsense --- it is at least a matter of definition or a ... theorem and as such a matter of proof. ... N is usually understood as an abbreviation for the set of natural ... If this set has a cardinal number, then it may be called omega. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: My claim on Omegas defn
    ... >> It does matter if you define OMEGA as the reason reals are uncountable ... >> and then you say nobody can use it. ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: My claim on Omegas defn
    ... >> It does matter if you define OMEGA as the reason reals are uncountable ... >> and then you say nobody can use it. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: My claim on Omegas defn
    ... >> It does matter if you define OMEGA as the reason reals are uncountable ... >> and then you say nobody can use it. ...
    (sci.logic)