Am I a crank?
in [Math]
|
Prev: Any coordinate system in GR?
Next: Euclidean Spaces
From: Virgil on 31 Aug 2006 19:05 In article <asfef2dp88qp6khme53ttl5kk6ilieuev8(a)4ax.com>, Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:04:44 -0600, Virgil <virgil(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >In article <fd6ef2lhai4j05a73goceh4tveovu0lcvb(a)4ax.com>, > > Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > >> So definitions in modern math are not true? > > > >Nor false. A definition is merely a request to allow one thing to > >represent another. > >Even if that other thing does not exist, one can at worst only decline > >the request. > > So now neomathematics is anthropomorphic too? My what a fantastic > beastie indeed. Beats Zick's neo-anti-mathematics every time.
From: Virgil on 31 Aug 2006 19:12 In article <pvfef2du45tb18i8tpuagh4gujc81flqrd(a)4ax.com>, Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:20:55 -0600, Virgil <virgil(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > >In article <1157024892.614341.149030(a)e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, > > schoenfeld.one(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > >> Definitions can be false too (i.e. "Let x be an even odd"). > > > >That definition is not false, as it does not say that any such thing > >exists. Nor is it true. It is merely impossible to fulfill. > > Arbiter dicta are often difficult to fulfill but we do the best we can > anyway. Definitions, not being enforceable, are not 'arbiter dicta'.
From: Dik T. Winter on 31 Aug 2006 19:08 In article <1g6ef29j95erganm4b51kteh5ab6d7pcdf(a)4ax.com> Lester Zick <dontbother(a)nowhere.net> writes: .... > >Zick claims that mathematicians claim their axioms to be true. > >What evidence does he have of this claim? > >Like most of his claims here, none! > > Actually Zick claims that modern mathematikers claim their axioms are > not true. Mathematicians do not claim axioms to be either true or false. They are non-provable basic assumptions. And when reasoning within a certain set of axioms they are assumed to be true. Whether they are true or false outside that certain set of axioms is not stated. -- dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131 home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
From: Dik T. Winter on 31 Aug 2006 19:12 In article <1157052981.177594.80970(a)p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Han.deBruijn(a)DTO.TUDelft.NL writes: .... > Is that so? Lately, I found that if you have ten apples and five > people, then you can give everybody two apples. I checked > this with the axioms of arithmetic and found that 10 / 5 = 2. Interesting. What are the axioms of arithmetic? -- dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131 home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
From: fernando revilla on 31 Aug 2006 15:20
DontBother(a)nowhere.net wrote: > So how exactly do definitions differ from > propositions? In the posts of Jack Markan and Virgil, you have the answer. If you give a name to something with sense, you have a definition. Nobody say " a horse carriage or motor carriage that may be hired for short journeys" usually we say " cab ", that is a definition, an agreement ( time is gold ! ). Propositions are not agreements. Fernando. |