RE: Actual infinities.
October 17, 2017 at 3:06 pm
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2017 at 3:12 pm by RoadRunner79.)
(October 17, 2017 at 2:34 pm)Jehanne Wrote:(October 17, 2017 at 2:20 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: So you have a set of numbers that do not represent anything? Then they are just numbers, that do not correspond to the two points in any way.
And what you are describing is a potential infinite, because per your wikipedia page
Do you agree, that even if you can potentially divide something infinity, that your results each time are a finite number?
No, I am saying that the sum of those finite numbers (their ordinality) is infinite. But, once again, please answer my question, "Are some potential infinities bigger than others?"
I agree, that you can make up fractions potentially forever. However what they represent is still part of a finite thing. You are talking about the process.
I do think, that the more loosely define your set, then a infinite multi-dimensional array would be technically larger than and infinite single dimension array (such as used in addition).
How do you apply this to the topic?
Its seems, that you are talking about abstractions, not in any way reference to the two points of the OP. How do you connect these?
Do you see the logical contradiction with having an actual completed set, that is by definition never complete?
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
