Re: A calculus of personal identity

2006-07-13 Thread James N Rose
Thank you for your responses, Bruno. I will reply in return. As an overview to my original theme, I believe you missed several key notions.First, yes, I am bothered by interpretations of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems, but I avoid getting entangled in debating 'interpretations' by getting

RE: A calculus of personal identity

2006-07-13 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
Lee Corbin writes: Thereisanimportantdifferencebetweennormativestatementsanddescriptiveorempiricalstatements.QuotingfromWikipedia: "Descriptive(orconstative)statementsarefalsifiablestatementsthatattempttodescribereality.Normative

Re: Infinities, cardinality, diagonalisation

2006-07-13 Thread Quentin Anciaux
Hi, thank you for your answer.But then I have another question, N is usually said to contains positive integer number from 0 to +infinity... but then it seems it should contains infinite length integer number... but then you enter the problem I've shown, so N shouldn't contains infinite length

Re: Infinities, cardinality, diagonalisation

2006-07-13 Thread Jesse Mazer
Quentin Anciaux wrote: Hi, thank you for your answer. But then I have another question, N is usually said to contains positive integer number from 0 to +infinity... but then it seems it should contains infinite length integer number... but then you enter the problem I've shown, so N shouldn't

Re: Infinities, cardinality, diagonalisation

2006-07-13 Thread Tom Caylor
N is defined as the positive integers, {0, 1, 2, 3, ...}, i.e. the *countable* integers. (I am used to starting with 1 in number theory.) N does not include infinity, neither the countable infinity aleph_0 nor any other higher infinity. Infinite length integers fall into this category of

Re: Infinities, cardinality, diagonalisation

2006-07-13 Thread Tom Caylor
Technically, I should say that countable means that the set can be put into a one-to-one correspondence with *a subset of* N, to include finite sets. Tom Tom Caylor wrote: N is defined as the positive integers, {0, 1, 2, 3, ...}, i.e. the *countable* integers. (I am used to starting with 1

(offlist) Bruno's argument

2006-07-13 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
Quentin, I think I can follow Bruno's UDA up to the point of the point where he shows that comp = no material world exists. You seem to understand it and you aren't Bruno (at least, I assume you're not Bruno: none of us on this list can really be sure of these things, can we? ;). Would you be

Re: Theory of Nothing available

2006-07-13 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Russell, Congratulations on the publication of your book! I look forward to getting the hard copy in my hands, as long PDF documents give me headaches. The Australian Booksurge website does not seem to be working, so I'll try again later and use one of the other sites to order the book if it's