Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science

From: Neil W Rickert (rickert+nn_at_cs.niu.edu)
Date: 02/14/05 

Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:23:22 +0000 (UTC)

Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@cornell.edu> writes:
>Neil W Rickert said:
>> Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@cornell.edu> writes:
>> >Neil W Rickert said:
>> >> Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@cornell.edu> writes:

>> >> >Or, you can simply admit that there are more real numbers between 0 and
>> >> >2 than there are between 0 and 1, even if the "cardinality" is the same,
>> >> >for instance, 1.5.

>> >> Of course there are more real numbers between 0 and 2, than between 0
>> >> and 1 ... for some meanings of "more". But Cantor's theory of
>> >> cardinality wasn't about those meanings of "more".
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

>What do you think I have been saying all this time? No more, no less.

What you have been saying all along has been WRONG. You repeatedly
accuse mathematicians and Cantor of making claims that they have
never made.

>You get what I am saying but you don't get that it's what I am saying,
>because you really haven't been paying attention.

Apparently you don't even know what you are saying.

> Do you think there is
>any merit to developing a more refined definition of "more", or is it
>really alright to say a proper subset can be exactly equal to its
>superset? Is this that so hard or ridiculous a question?

There you go again. You are repeating the same mistake.

Mathematicians have many notions of "more". I doubt that any
refinement is needed.

You are taking one particular such notion, intended for very special
purposes, and you are misusing it by assuming that it has other
purposes. Then you falsely accuse Cantor and mathematician of being
confused or mistaken. YOU are the one confused and mistaken.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... accuse mathematicians and Cantor of making claims that they have ... You are repeating the same mistake. ... Mathematicians have many notions of "more". ... Then you falsely accuse Cantor and mathematician of being ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... accuse mathematicians and Cantor of making claims that they have ... You are repeating the same mistake. ... Mathematicians have many notions of "more". ... Then you falsely accuse Cantor and mathematician of being ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: An uncountable countable set
    ... The society of mathematicians is limited of those who agree to accept ... On the contrary, Cantor, and others, have specifically defined valid ... Standards of proof are not democratic. ... You also assumed that you could convert between dense ordering and well ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Is one-to-one mapping valid for comparing infinite-sized sets?
    ... Cantor did never disprove Galilei. ... Many mathematicians do not trust in AC for serious reasons. ... Galilei wrote dialogi between Simplicio, Sargredo, and Salviati. ... Galilei's pseudonym Salviati was the name of a friend of Galilei. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Partial difference equation, primes
    ... >> My prime counting function uses a partial difference equation. ... Mathematicians are more and more getting on my nerves as they want ... so many people keep repeating the same thing that it must be true. ... They're insulting your intelligence with their lies. ...
    (sci.physics)