Re: The modern mathematical concept of infinity is indefensible

In article <44cdb$497d9719$82a1e228$8662@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Virgil wrote:

In article <8cf12$497d72b8$82a1e228$8296@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Virgil wrote:

In article
<fdc29d2c-cbdb-4940-9f1c-fd2e4e6c4bda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
umumenu@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On 25 jan, 00:43, David R Tribble <da...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Mitch Harris wrote:

I don't see how they are different. We can work with representations
('-a + a = 0', 'oo + 1 = oo', or we can work with the ideas
(negatives, where a number plus its negative is zero, orinfinity,
where adding 1 toinfinityresults ininfinity). I don't think one can
show a physicalinfinityand I think that's what you're saying (on the
other hand I think -I- can) but I also think you can similarly not do
it for negatives. (hm...I think I can do that too)

Han de Bruijn wrote:

It's freezing: minus 9 degrees centigrade. Right ?

Ralf Bader wrote:

Wrong. Bad temperature scale.

Han de Bruijn wrote:

Suppose you have minus 500 Euro on your bank account ?

Then you owe someone 500 Euro.
So I guess -9 C outside means someone is owed 9 degrees.

Unless your thermometer is written in Fahrenheit.

What was the temperature of the Universe just before the Big Bang?

There hasn't been a Big Bang.

How can you be so sure? The best scientific theorists cannot exclude it,
so how can you.

The Big Bang would start with a singularity, right ? Well, let me tell
you that there ARE NO singularities in Nature. Natura non facit saltus.

And did God tell you that? If not, excuse me that I do not accept your
word.

And even if you were to claim God told you, I would need better evidence
than your word before accepting it as Gospel.

My response to Tonio:

Think whatever you want, but you can not deny that HdB's behaviour is
nothing but CONSISTENT through time. If one is denying the existence of
actual infinity, as HdB does, then the existence of singularities MUST
be denied as well. Because the latter contain infinities. Consequence
is also that the Big Bang theory cannot be valid within this framework.

See? There are axioms and there are theorems. The axiom is that infinity
cannot exist, as a completed entity. The theorem is that there is no Big
Bang. Just an axiom and logic.

Your no Big Bang, or equivalent, and no singularity in nature together
imply that there is no beginning to time, i.e., past time is actually
infinite.
.

Relevant Pages
Loading