RE: Actual infinities.
October 17, 2017 at 1:36 pm
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2017 at 1:37 pm by Jehanne.)
(October 17, 2017 at 1:24 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(October 17, 2017 at 1:10 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Mathematicians (and, by extension, physicists) do not make that distinction:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_infinity
You started by trying to make the distinction in calling it an actual infinity! Now you are trying to slip away from it?
Have you figured out what your set of infinity is yet (defined it)?
And if you can apply infinity without any distinction are you really describing or saying anything at all?
Here it is:
Quote:In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads:
In words, there is a set I (the set which is postulated to be infinite), such that the empty set is in I and such that whenever any x is a member of I, the set formed by taking the union of x with its singleton {x} is also a member of I. Such a set is sometimes called an inductive set.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermelo%E2...f_infinity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_of_infinity