Logic
in [Science]
|
what to do about the Successor axiom once it reaches 999....9999#318; Correcting Math Nam Nguyen wrote: Archimedes Plutonium wrote: David R Tribble wrote: Archimedes Plutonium wrote: The Peano Axioms are flawed and inconsistent because they require a Successor Axiom which builds this set {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, . . . . , 9999....9999} Unfortunately, you have never de... 13 Feb 2010 14:56
defining finite-number and finite-line #342; Correcting Math Archimedes Plutonium wrote: Nam Nguyen wrote: You've challenged few of us to come up with the definition of "finite- number" or else you'd go on with your ignorant babbling. So here they are, the definition of properties Finite(x) and Infinite(x): P(x) <-> Ey[y <= x) ... 25 Jan 2010 10:32
precision definition of a finite-line compared to finite-number #338; Correcting Math Brian wrote: You have the number of ways q quanta can be arranged. Next you have the number of ways of arranging these arrangements. Continue long enough and you'll eventually surpass the "largest number" in finitely many steps. Well, Brian, mathematics first job is to define precisely what fin... 25 Jan 2010 01:48
what to do about the Successor axiom once it reaches 999....9999 #332; Correcting Math David R Tribble wrote: Archimedes Plutonium wrote: The Peano Axioms are flawed and inconsistent because they require a Successor Axiom which builds this set {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, . . . . , 9999....9999} David R Tribble wrote: Unfortunately, you have never demonstrated how this ... 24 Jan 2010 15:50
the characteristics and features of Infinity #331 Correcting Math Let me try to list what I can about the characteristics and features of Infinity. Clues that come from Physics and math. Is infinity in physics the duality to zero or nothingness? Now does it make sense that endlessness is the dual of nothingness? Likewise can we say that infinity is the same as everything? I ... 24 Jan 2010 04:38
Summary of the changes needed for Peano Axioms #326 ; Correcting Math Up until the last several posts, I thought the Successor Axiom was going to survive the changes, but it looks as though it needs refurbishing also. It looks as though Peano presumed the Natural Numbers as Counting Numbers within the Successor function, whereas the Series was the better means of defining successi... 23 Jan 2010 02:18
history of Series and why Peano did not use Series for Successor #325 ; Correcting Math First I need the actual history events of mathematics, and then I will proffer my own speculation as to why Peano went off track, off course with a Successor Function axiom rather than to tie into the bulwark of history by giving this axiom a Series definition. It would be helpful if Peano left behind alot of not... 22 Jan 2010 16:21
CLIMATE-GATE, RELATIVITY-GATE, ENTROPY-GATE http://communities.canada.com/calgaryherald/print.aspx?postid=542737 "Real scientists would care about Climategate fraud. The Climategate e- mails are the proverbial smoking gun, but it's curious so few scientists cared about the bleeding scientific body lying at their feet. The word fraud and climate science are b... 13 Apr 2010 02:56
Some history on the Series concept #324 should be #3 ; Correcting Math Now Wikipedia is good for an overall perspective of Series in mathematics, but not good for tracking down some dates and those mathematicians who contributed to the progress of Series as a subject of mathematics. --- quoting Wikipedia on some pitfalls of Series --- Potential confusion When talking about ... 21 Jan 2010 15:46
From Cauchy to Hensel p-adics should have been Cauchy to Peano #323 should be #2 ; Correcting Math Archimedes Plutonium wrote: P.S. the next time any person tries to persuade you that the Successor cannot create an infinite-number. Then just turn the tables on him by saying " so you think that the series 1 + 1 + ....+ 1 does not go to infinity but is equal to a finite-number. Alright... 21 Jan 2010 15:46 |