Article View: sci.physics.relativity
Article #77Re: A definition of an infinity, perhaps!?
From: |-| E R C
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:58
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:58
67 lines
4615 bytes
4615 bytes
On Oct 17, 7:37 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 17 Okt., 10:57, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So how do you explain {Champerno..} constant.
>
> > 0.123456789101112131415....
>
> > or this one
>
> > 0.10110111011110111110111111011111110111111110....
>
> > A small turing machine will construct this on a tape indefinitely!
>
> But it will never complete this number. That's the difference between
> potential and actual infinity. Cantorians are ready to continue after
> completing this number with omega + 1, .... They are ready to accept a
> complete infinite set without an end. But they shy away from a
> triangle with two missing ends, although the cardinalities of all
> sides follow from symmetry.
>
> Regards, WM
You're probably right! Set theory is the biggest MESS conceivable!
You should read some of it... EVERY TOPIC IS INFESTED
WITH ...UNCOUNTABLE MODEL R..
or even more stupid THEN ADD A GODEL STATEMENT AND IT PROVES
X=CON(Y)_modelT
IT'S A FRICKING GIANT CESS PIT OF A JOKE!
NONE OF IT PROVES ANYTHING! NOT ONE SINGLE CONJECTURE...
Some uncountable nonsense in some model T proved that FOL couldn't
prove 2 network models were disjoint, but it's just trivial invocation
of 2OL since it involves FORALL(F)! they glossed it up in TOTAL
NONSENSE.
LOGIC is a giant SHAM! It's 5,000 TEXT BOOKS OF NOTES based on...
123
456
789
FLIP(159) = 604
OH WHHHOPPEEE FRICKING DO! IT'S MISSING!
IT'S ALSO A DIAGONAL OF ANY INFINITE LIST YOU COULD THINK OF!
Godel Statement = "this formula has no proof"
THEN IT'S NOT FRICKING TRUE THEN IS IT?
___________
So although a complete N finished infinity theory could be supported
without contradiction, I think it's 20 years away while the current
98% of logic theory is CULLED.
Herc
--
http://MATHEOLOGY.com
"It's bigger than Infinity!"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<377c561c-0253-4d7c-84d2-9b1b97641ba2@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!d5ni21085pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<106ae260-7347-4e32-8771-3858a1503af9@g33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> <8c6cacb7-98bb-43ee-b88d-4892cf2bcd8f@w5g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <1766c561-6603-4352-94ab-1bcf70559ca1@v15g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <73a7939e-6ca4-4545-82e6-bb1d309b6fde@v11g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <87vcroel8j.fsf@phiwumbda.org> <bb0f8cba-373c-416d-b0b5-792170d315ef@m1g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <fdf16f53-7279-4474-97fa-b2705c1c5920@u2g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> <63647a02-341c-4a58-a2f5-c4dc1967c372@42g2000prp.googlegroups.com> <038b7b16-fd34-4435-82ee-ee7ec9a2b9b2@v38g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> <bf8bf1e7-7e7d-4db8-808b-6b1287946714@h39g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <9ec3e103-246c-4588-b850-fd9f004862d6@h5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com> <a145cecd-9c0f-4779-8912-a3f851e7fff0@v8g2000pro.googlegroups.com> <b3bd7b7b-0e74-4b10-978c-78eae39370cf@f13g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10f545,6ffd34a905b67f04
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 10b271,6ffd34a905b67f04
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 109d8a,6ffd34a905b67f04
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: fd648,79e4b6580f667c81
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gid41be78289e,gid54ac8f410d,gid9ef9b79ae9,giddb42311052,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.21.229 with SMTP id y5mr24746703pbe.1.1318846302358;
Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!d5ni21085pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "|-| E R C" <herc.of.zeus@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,aus.science
Subject: Re: A definition of an infinity, perhaps!?
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 02:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <377c561c-0253-4d7c-84d2-9b1b97641ba2@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
References: <106ae260-7347-4e32-8771-3858a1503af9@g33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
<8c6cacb7-98bb-43ee-b88d-4892cf2bcd8f@w5g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
<1766c561-6603-4352-94ab-1bcf70559ca1@v15g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
<73a7939e-6ca4-4545-82e6-bb1d309b6fde@v11g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
<87vcroel8j.fsf@phiwumbda.org> <bb0f8cba-373c-416d-b0b5-792170d315ef@m1g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
<fdf16f53-7279-4474-97fa-b2705c1c5920@u2g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
<63647a02-341c-4a58-a2f5-c4dc1967c372@42g2000prp.googlegroups.com>
<038b7b16-fd34-4435-82ee-ee7ec9a2b9b2@v38g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
<bf8bf1e7-7e7d-4db8-808b-6b1287946714@h39g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
<9ec3e103-246c-4588-b850-fd9f004862d6@h5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
<a145cecd-9c0f-4779-8912-a3f851e7fff0@v8g2000pro.googlegroups.com> <b3bd7b7b-0e74-4b10-978c-78eae39370cf@f13g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 42.241.122.221
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1318846302 3298 127.0.0.1 (17 Oct 2011 10:11:42 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:11:42 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com; posting-host=42.241.122.221; posting-account=1vtkkQoAAADVEVK9BuzmgiVcGOP6mFFe
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: ARLUEHNKC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1;
Trident/4.0; BTRS122332; SIMBAR={FF77F06E-B2E1-478A-B764-515D55581AAF};
SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; HPMTDF;
BRI/2; .NET4.0C; AskTB5.5),gzip(gfe)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable