Re: 2 backview questions
- From: Ken Quirici <kquirici@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:37:00 -0800 (PST)
On Feb 12, 2:13 pm, Arturo Magidin <magi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 12, 12:17 pm, Ken Quirici <kquir...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 12, 12:55 pm, Arturo Magidin <magi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 12, 11:50 am, Ken Quirici <kquir...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What's the backview of .234234234234234.......?
What's the backview of sqrt(2)?
One can imagine that
.9999......9999999999
is like a shopping bag with two handles, one on the right (9),
one on the left (9), and an infinite number of digits in between.
One could, if it made sense to think of having a "last" digit when
there are an infinite number of digits in between and the order type
of the sequence is omega.
If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a bicycle. What does that
make my grandfather?
I agree with you entirely. My point in the post was to
focus some intelligent and informed attention on the 'backview'
concept, which it has done successfully:-)
The only intelligent and informed attention that this 'backview'
concept deserves is: "it's nonsense". That you would begin a post by
asking the question without bothering to think about how and why it is
nonsense belies your latter claim; in short: you can stop bluffing,
you ain't fooling anyone.
What do you think I'm trying to fool everybody about?
I asked two patently foolish questions in the hope that someone
in another thread who has been insisting on the
meaningfulness of these backview and frontview concepts
would see them as foolish concepts.
Knowing there was slight chance of that, I also
hoped a real mathematician would answer with the
authority that a real mathematician would provide.
I was delighted to see you had responded since I know
you to be a real mathematician.
I'm glad these two 'concepts' have gotten their
due but I wish I hadn't been tarred by that same
brush.
If your purpose had been to be told that you were speaking nonsense,
consider yourself told so. But somehow, I don't think that's what it
was.
And yet, it is still nonsense.
--
Arturo Magidin, sans .sig
.
- References:
- 2 backview questions
- From: Ken Quirici
- Re: 2 backview questions
- From: Arturo Magidin
- Re: 2 backview questions
- From: Ken Quirici
- Re: 2 backview questions
- From: Arturo Magidin
- 2 backview questions
- Prev by Date: Inconsistency of the usual axioms of set theory
- Next by Date: measure theory question(minimal algebra, minimal ring)
- Previous by thread: Re: 2 backview questions
- Next by thread: Re: 2 backview questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
