Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science

From: Daryl McCullough (stevendaryl3016_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 03/17/05


Date: 17 Mar 2005 10:41:20 -0800

Tony says...
>
>Daryl McCullough said:

>> Are you saying that if I write down
>>
>> 3 1 4
>>
>> that suddenly 3 has lost its meaning? *I* still remember what it
>> means, even if you don't. With a little practice, you can learn
>> to recite your telephone number, or the digits of pi, even when
>> the digits are out of order. The digits don't lose their meaning.
>
>If you are saying 3 comes before 1, which immediately precedes 4 in a number
>system, then you are changing the meaning of the numerals.

Who said anything about a number system? I am talking about orderings
of the natural number system. Sometimes, we write 3 before 1; for example,
when we are writing out the decimal expansion of pi. That doesn't mean
that 3 has lost its meaning.

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY


Relevant Pages

  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... Daryl McCullough said: ... > the digits are out of order. ... The digits don't lose their meaning. ... If you are saying 3 comes before 1, which immediately precedes 4 in a number ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... Daryl McCullough said: ... > the digits are out of order. ... The digits don't lose their meaning. ... If you are saying 3 comes before 1, which immediately precedes 4 in a number ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... Daryl McCullough said: ... > the digits are out of order. ... The digits don't lose their meaning. ... If you are saying 3 comes before 1, which immediately precedes 4 in a number ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Cantors "diagonal argument". My Objection.
    ... Daryl McCullough wrote: ... for the success of his diagonal argument that the cardinality of the set ... of infinite sequences of digits is greater than the cardinality of the ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Cantors "diagonal argument". My Objection.
    ... Daryl McCullough wrote: ... Did Cantor have to assume for the success of his diagonal argument that the cardinality of the set of infinite sequences of digits is greater than the cardinality of the set of finite sequences of digits? ...
    (sci.logic)

Quantcast