| Subject: | Re: Cantor's diagonalization argument |
|---|---|
| From: | "MoeBlee" |
| Date: | 31 Oct 2006 12:40:56 -0800 |
| Newsgroups: | sci.math, sci.logic |
Mark-T wrote: > OK, but that's a much simpler case, which doesn't raise the > thorny issues of the diagonalization argument... What thorny issues? You can make a briar patch of any mathematics if you insist that the mathematics is some devised metaphorical version of that mathematics. The answer is: don't do that. MoeBlee |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: An uncountable countable set, Virgil |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Distance between a point and y = ax^2 + bx + c, Magnus |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Cantor's diagonalization argument, Mark-T |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Cantor's diagonalization argument, Dik T. Winter |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |