Cantor's Diagonal?
in [Logic]
|
Prev: The set theoretic content of the transfinite recursion theorem
Next: Geometry surface area Contact; related to "flatness"; Pedestal-Geometry #386 Correcting Math
From: Transfer Principle on 12 Feb 2010 18:48 On Feb 10, 4:56 am, FredJeffries <fredjeffr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 9, 2:01 pm, Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > <snip /> > > the standard theorist Jeffries > That you consider Fred Jeffries a standard theorist does not say much > for your method of classification. In the past few days, there have been several more objections to my use of the phrase "standard theorist." I came up with the name "standard theorist" when many posters objected to the name "Cantorian" (which was invented by several so-called "cranks" who opposed Cantor or ZFC). But the name "standard theorist" is still apparently objectionable. Unfortunately, I still have yet to come up with a better name for those who defend standard theories such as ZFC, ZF, NBG, and FOL from "crank" attacks. So I'll continue to use the name, but perhaps sometimes interspersing it with the labels non-"crank" for those who don't exhibit "crank" tendencies, and anti-"crank" for those who actively oppose the "cranks." No matter how the standard theorists/non-"cranks"/anti-"cranks" object, I will never replace those labels with any label that acknowledges their opinion that only they are actually doing mathematics or that what the "cranks" are doing isn't actually mathematics at all. So labels like "actual/true mathematicians" vs. "non-mathematicians" (for the "cranks") are out. The standard theorists would love it if I started using those labels, but I definitely will not.
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 12 Feb 2010 19:12 Transfer Principle <lwalke3(a)lausd.net> writes: > Unfortunately, I still have yet to come up with a better name for > those who defend standard theories such as ZFC, ZF, NBG, and > FOL from "crank" attacks. Have you ever considered the possibility that the issue is not "crank" attacks, but crank "attacks"? -- Jesse F. Hughes "Being wrong is easy, knowing when you're right can be hard, but actually being right and knowing it, is the hardest thing of all." -- James S. Harris
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 12 Feb 2010 19:07 Transfer Principle <lwalke3(a)lausd.net> writes: > I admit that JSH doesn't fit in the categories I mentioned so > far. But still, I usually avoid defending JSH (since to me, his > latest claims of having proved the Twin Primes and Goldbach > Conjectures in PA using only elementary math is indefensible). Thus, > JSH will be considered a crank (no scare quotes). As usual, you are incapable of reporting on the claims of others. JSH does *not* claim to have proved anything in PA. As far as I recall, JSH has never worked in Peano Arithmetic nor given any hint that he knows what PA is -- even in an addled sense. Moreover, his current claims involve probabilistic reasoning, which perhaps one may represent in PA in some way, but he surely isn't bothering to do so. So, back off my favorite crank (indeed, my favorite sci.math poster). You don't get him. -- Jesse F. Hughes "What does soap kill? Germs or Germans?" -- Quincy P. Hughes (age 3 1/2) asks for clarification
From: Frederick Williams on 12 Feb 2010 19:21 Transfer Principle wrote: > > [...] Let me repeat this one for emphasis: > > > > III. Standard theorists prefer the use of symbolic object > > > language to natural metalanguage. To standard theorists, > > > natural languages such as English lack the mathematical > > > precision of symbolic language, and so all axioms must be > > > stated using symbolic language only. An axiom written in > > > metalanguage isn't truly an axiom to standard theorists. > > > "Cranks," on the other hand, prefer the use of metalanguage > > > to object language. Symbolic object languages alone won't do. As well as axioms one needs rules of inference and for those a metalanguage must be used. -- .... A lamprophyre containing small phenocrysts of olivine and augite, and usually also biotite or an amphibole, in a glassy groundmass containing analcime.
From: MoeBlee on 12 Feb 2010 19:43
On Feb 12, 5:48 pm, Transfer Principle <lwal...(a)lausd.net> wrote: > their opinion that only they are actually doing > mathematics Who has stated that opinion? MoeBlee |