Re: .9 repeating

lwalke3@xxxxxxxxx writes:

On Mar 18, 12:57 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
lwal...@xxxxxxxxx writes:
OK, then. So it's better for me to say that standard analysts
find theories such as NSA or those with adjacent points to be
didactically unsound and mathematically barren -- so that's
why they prefer standard analysis. Better?
You might as well claim that number theorists don't believe there is
any number between 0 and 1, or that working in the theory of rationals
is didactically unsound or mathematically barren.  Most
mathematicians don't have this fixation with acceptance and rejection
of different theories.

But they do have this fixation with labeling certain theories
as "crank" theories. And so far, the theory of adjacent
infinitesimals is still labeled a "crank" theory, since they
discourage any attempt to make adjacent infinitesimals into a
rigorous theory.

There is no theory of adjacent infinitesimals that I know of.

Tell you what: gather up every utterance that Mitch has made regarding
his mathematical theory and put them all together. Then tell me if
you really think that this collection serves as a theory in some
reasonable sense.

--
Jesse F. Hughes
"Truth is common stuff, ready to your hand, but lies you have to make
yourself, and you can't be sure they are any good until you've
used them --- and then it's too late." John Steinbeck
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: .9 repeating
    ... is didactically unsound or mathematically barren. ... But they do have this fixation with labeling certain theories ... as "crank" theories. ... infinitesimals is still labeled a "crank" theory, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: .9 repeating
    ... is didactically unsound or mathematically barren. ... infinitesimals is still labeled a "crank" theory, ... Define the ordered pair in RxZ, with r in ... The set of lwalke3 reals is ordered such that for any i and ...
    (sci.math)