On 10/23/2014 12:36 AM, LizR wrote:
On 23 October 2014 15:14, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
But by the same kind of positivist attitude there's no reason to think that
every
integer has a successor. It's just a convenient assumption for doing proofs
and
calculations.
So do you think there's a largest integer? If so, how might one determine what
it is?
I think we invented the integers, so it's up to us whether we want there to be a largest
integer. It is certainly is more convenient to reason about some things by assuming there
is not, but that's true of real numbers too.
Brent
Obviously it's larger than Graham's Number (It could become known as Brent's
Number!)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything
List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
