Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 03/16/05
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: eleaticus: "Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- In reply to: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:20:24 -0500
Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
>
> Except that unbounded is the same as "without end". That's what "infinite"
> literally means.
Will you stop confusing your sloppy use of everyday language with
precise technical definitions. The word "infinite" has several distinct
meanings (in a mathematical context) and this has been pointed out to
repeatedly. Mathematics has a technical vocabulary which bears a
conincidental similarity to common usage. In the common lexicon
"infinite" means something like "indefnite". "Finite" in the common
lexicon is approximately the same as "definite".
Our discussion from the very beginning has been about the mathematical
context, not about common usage.
Bob Kolker
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: eleaticus: "Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- In reply to: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|