PROOF INFINITY DOES NOT EXIST! Not even ONE type [Logic]

Prev: EINSTEIN'S ABUSE OF TIME
Next: NP+complete-problem navigation, search In computational complexity theory, the complexity class NP-complete (abbreviated NP-C or NPC), is a class of problems having two properties: * It is in the set of NP (nondeterministic polynomial time) pr

From: Don Stockbauer on 12 Jul 2010 09:03

On Jul 12, 1:38 am, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote
> >>> To me, it is self-evident that the axiom of infinity is true.
>
> wrong attribution..
>
> Herc

I have an affinity for infinity.

From: Wolf K on 12 Jul 2010 09:35

On 12/07/2010 01:22, K_h wrote:
> "Curt Welch"<curt(a)kcwc.com> wrote in message
> news:20100711120058.644$rX(a)newsreader.com...
>> "K_h"<KHolmes(a)SX729.com> wrote:
>>> In regular arithmetic 4+5=9 is true but Curt was claiming
>>> that there is some tiny chance it could be wrong in regular arithmetic.
>>> Curt is obviously wrong there.
>>
>> If you limit the scope of the measure of "truth" to "in regular arithmetic"
>> then you are correct, it's an absolute truth. I was not talking about "in
>> regular arithmetic". I was talking about "in life". I was talking about
>> reality vs the fairy tale stories we make up called "in regular
>> arithmetic". In the stories we make up, we pretend that absolute truth can
>
> The truth embodied in 4+5=9 is an absolute truth in life. It is not a "fairy
> tale". This is all obvious.

a) No actual "in life" measurement is exact, there is always a
measurement error. 4 miles east + 4 miles east = 9 miles east +/- some
measurement error, which is always uncertain past some number of
significant digits. Which should remind you of the issue of accuracy vs.
precision, the misunderstanding of which leads to such absurdities as
claiming that a 3.45 grade point average is better than a 3.44 average.
Ironically, it's the truths of "regular arithmetic" that enable one to
understand why these numbers are absurd.

b) 4 miles east plus 5 miles west is not 9 miles northwest.

c) 4 pints of water plus 5 pints of ethanol do not produce 9 pints of vodka.

Etc.

wolf k.

From: Wolf K on 12 Jul 2010 09:43

On 11/07/2010 02:54, Transfer Principle wrote:
> On Jul 9, 6:22 am, Wolf K<weki...(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> IOW, you stopped thinking around grade 5 or 6.
>
> Wolf K.'s reference to grades 5-6 here is interesting, since
> this is around the age that students are required to refer to
> infinitary concepts.

The math curriculum varies quite a bit between jurisdictions, and . What
I in mind is the fact that around grade six most of us have formed a
world picture, and find it more or less impossible to change it as
puberty rebuilds our brain. Cranks are merely the most extreme examples
of this: while most people seem content to say "Well, that's something I
don't understand", cranks try to disprove what they don't understand.

cheers,
wolf k.

From: Wolf K on 12 Jul 2010 09:46

On 08/07/2010 16:50, |-|ercules wrote:
[...]
> Actually Curt is spot on. Godel's proof is a farce. Come back when you
> can tell me
> the truth value of the following proposition:
>
> This statement cannot be proven by MoeBlee
>
> True or false Moeblee? Don't forget to give your reasoning!
>
> Herc

You challenge assumes that the test statement has something to do with
GT. It doesn't.

cheers,
wolf k.

From: Wolf K on 12 Jul 2010 09:55

On 09/07/2010 16:44, George Greene wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2:36 pm, c...(a)kcwc.com (Curt Welch) wrote:
>> You have to be careful in such debates to understand what "exists" means
>> and how you are using it.
>
> You MEANT to say that ONE has to be careful.
> *I* certainly do not have to be any more careful than usual.
> I am already aware of the point you are trying to make here.
> You are in no position to lecture me personally.
> You have to be careful in these debates to understand what "you"
> means,
> and how you are going to be perceived as using it.

Curt is using "you" as the generic pronoun, more formally expressed by
using "one", as in "One must not assume that "you" means oneself."

cheers,
wolf k.