Are natural numbers isomorphic to complex numbers?
in [Math]
|
Prev: 3 dimensions and their 4 directions
Next: Redshift and Microwave radiation favor Atom Totality and disfavor Big Bang #9; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) theory; replaces Big Bang theory
From: Transfer Principle on 6 Jun 2010 01:37 On Jun 3, 11:56 pm, Ostap Bender <ostap_bender_1...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 3, 2:39 pm, Akira Bergman <akiraberg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > All I did was to ask a question. They remind me some of my university > > teachers. They used to say; "Do not ask meaning questions, just work > > the formalism. Intuition means nothing without formalism." They are > > like the preachers of the fundamentalist religions. Bergman compares mathematicians to adherents of a religion, just as Herc has compared mathematicians to adherents of some religion, just as I have compared adherents of ZFC to adherents of a religion. An interesting pattern seems to be developing. > Well, maybe you too should head your own advice, and go read a basic > book on set theory, and not post any more on this topic until you have > a good understanding (if ever). And here we go with buying a book as a prerequisite to posting in a thread. And once again, I remind posters that not everyone can even _afford_ a textbook. Note what Bergman wrote about his employment situation: > > I don't have to work for a while. There is nothing like freedom from > > doing others work. I don't know what this means about Bergman's financial situation -- is he unemployed, or is he merely on vacation or leave? If the former, then one might want to keep that in mind before asking Bergman to buy a textbook. According to Bender, Bergman also asked another poster to buy a book as a prereq to posting. If this is the case, then the suggestion is no better coming from Bergman than it is coming from Bender.
From: Ostap Bender on 6 Jun 2010 04:08 Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > On Jun 4, 10:19 pm, Ostap Bender <ostap_bender_1...(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Jun 4, 9:57 pm, Akira Bergman <akiraberg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > It means that N has all of the information that C has. You just have > > > to know how to look at it. > > It may be the case that a single atom contains all the information > > about the entire Universe, but it is hard to see than an atom and the > > Universe are isomorphic. > > A backhanded reference to AP and his Atom Totality > theory, of course. Who is AP? > Even though I am not an Atom Totalitarian, I see > nothing wrong with considering AP's theories when they > concern _mathematics_. > > As for Bergman, I'm not sure yet whether he's trying > to introduce a new theory, discuss standard theory (in > which case he's confused about what an algebraic > isomorphic is), or neither. Well, to be consistent, you should think that he is doing all three at the same time. I bet you don't see anything wrong with having a three- valued function, do you? On Jun 5, 10:19 pm, Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > On Jun 4, 11:39 pm, Ostap Bender <ostap_bender_1...(a)hotmail.com> > > And what is this thing: > > > 0^0 = {0,1} > > What kind of a number is {0,1}? It is not an element of R nor of C, is > > it? What multiplication group is it part of? > > I see nothing wrong with having a two-valued function, such as > the sqrt function.
From: Transfer Principle on 8 Jun 2010 12:04 On Jun 6, 1:08 am, Ostap Bender <ostap_bender_1...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > > On Jun 4, 10:19 pm, Ostap Bender <ostap_bender_1...(a)hotmail.com> > > wrote: > > > It may be the case that a single atom contains all the information > > > about the entire Universe, but it is hard to see than an atom and the > > > Universe are isomorphic. > > A backhanded reference to AP and his Atom Totality > > theory, of course. > Who is AP? Archimedes Plutonium. To learn more about his theory, search for and read any message which mentions the phrase "Atom Totality." In a nutshell, Atom Totality posits that whole entire Universe is just one big Plutonium atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies.
From: Marshall on 8 Jun 2010 15:26 On Jun 5, 10:37 pm, Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > > And here we go with buying a book as a prerequisite to > posting in a thread. And once again, I remind posters that > not everyone can even _afford_ a textbook. Every grownup can afford to buy a textbook. Marshall
From: MoeBlee on 8 Jun 2010 16:59
I couldn't imagine what it would be like to hang out with Transfer Principle. You'd see someone hold a door open for someone ten steps away but fail to hold it open for someone twenty steps away. Transfer Principle would be all over it, about the unfairness of it, about how the difference between ten and twenty steps is not enough to explain why one person had the door held open for him or her but not the other person. You couldn't buy a pack of gum without Transfer Principle scolding you for enabling an industry that contributes to the misfortune of people getting stuff stuck on the bottom of their shoes. |