# Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries

```2009/6/9 Torgny Tholerus <tor...@dsv.su.se>:
>
> Jesse Mazer skrev:
>>
>>
>> > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 21:17:03 +0200
>> > From: tor...@dsv.su.se
>> > Subject: Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries
>> >
>> > My philosophical argument is about the mening of the word "all". To be
>> > able to use that word, you must associate it with a value set.
>>
>> What's a "value set"? And why do you say we "must" associate it in
>> this way? Do you have a philosophical argument for this "must", or is
>> it just an edict that reflects your personal aesthetic preferences?
>>
>> > Mostly that set is "all objects in the universe", and if you stay
>> inside the
>> > universe, there is no problems.
>>
>> *I* certainly don't define numbers in terms of any specific mapping
>> between numbers and objects in the universe, it seems like a rather
>> strange notion--shall we have arguments over whether the number 113485
>> should be associated with this specific shoelace or this specific
>> kangaroo?
>
> When I talk about "universe" here, I do not mean our physical universe.
> What I mean is something that can be called "everything".  It includes
> all objects in our physical universe, as well as all symbols and all
> words and all numbers and all sets and all other universes.  It includes
> everything you can use the word "all" about.```
```
It includes all set, but no all set as it N includes all natural
number but not all natural number... excuse-me but this is non-sense.
Either N exists and has an infinite number of member and is
incompatible with an ultrafinitist view or N does not exists because
obviously N cannot be defined in an ultra-finitist way, any set that
contains a finite number of natural number (and still you haven't
defined what it is in an ultrafinitist way) are not the set N.

Also any operation involving two number (addition/multiplication) can
yield as result a number which has the same property as the departing
number (being a natural number) but is not natural number... Also
induction and inference cannot work in such a context.

> For you to be able to use the word "all", you must define the "domain"
> of that word.  If you do not define the domain, then it will be
> impossible for me and all other humans to understand what you are

Well you are the first and only human I know who don't understand
"all" as everybody else does.

Quentin Anciaux

>
> --
> Torgny Tholerus
>
> >
>

--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to