Brent Meeker skrev:
> Torgny Tholerus wrote:
>> I have written some more about infinity, in the paper attached (3
>> pages), called Infinity Does Not Exist.
> Well it doesn't exist under the assumption that it doesn't exist.  I actually 
> agree with you that it doesn't exist - though not because it's *logically* 
> impossible.  I think what you've shown is that there are other consistent 
> number systems - which just illustrates the point that what you get from 
> logic and mathematics depends on what you take as axioms and rules of 
> inference.
> But the problem is that a lot of mathematics would become very difficult and 
> convoluted if we didn't allow infinity (and infinitesimals).  This doesn't 
> bother physicists much because they are accustomed to regarding mathematics 
> as an approximate model and only using as much "infinity" as seems useful.

When it concerns mathematics, I have developped a set of integers that I 
myself call "unnatural numbers".  An unnatural number U is an integer 
that is bigger than every natural number N.  And the inverse of an 
unnatural number (1/U) is more close to zero than any real number.  You 
can count with these unnatural number in the same way as ordinary 
integers.  So you will have that U+1 is not equal to U, and N*N << 
sqrt(U), and so on.

Torgny Tholerus

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to