Brian Hulley wrote:
Piotr Kalinowski wrote:
On 22/06/06, Brian Hulley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For example, why do people accept that infinity == infinity + 1 ?
Surely this expression is just ill-typed. infinity can't be a number.
This equation is just a shortcut, so I can't see how can i
On 23/06/06, Brian Hulley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This equation is just a shortcut, so I can't see how can it be
> ill-typed. It means something like: if you add one element to an
> infinite list, will it be longer?
What does your intuition say about this?
It won't be longer. How can it b
Piotr Kalinowski wrote:
On 22/06/06, Brian Hulley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
This doesn't mean that these contradictions reflect reality - just
that maths hasn't yet reached a true understanding of reality imho.
Well, I for instance believe that contradiction IS the true nature of
reality.
On 22/06/06, Brian Hulley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
This doesn't mean that these contradictions reflect reality - just that
maths hasn't yet reached a true understanding of reality imho.
Well, I for instance believe that contradiction IS the true nature of
reality... ;)
For example, why
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 20:13 +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
. . .
> filter function), I can reason about my programs without entering the areas
> of maths that I don't believe in, which is one more reason for my desire to
> have a totally strict version of Haskell ;-)
This may also explain why th
Stepan Golosunov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 03:32:25PM +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
Bill Wood wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 15:16 +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
. . .
But how does this change the fact that y still has 1 more element
than yq? yq is after all, not a circular list.
I don't see why
> Therefore the list of non-negative integers is longer than the list of
> positive integers. I agree they have the same cardinality but this doesn't
> mean they have the same length.
Are you saying that some of the (0,1,2,3,4,5,...), (1,2,3,4,5,...) and
(1-1,2-1,3-1,4-1,5-1,...) lists have diffe
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 03:32:25PM +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
> Bill Wood wrote:
> >On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 15:16 +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
> > . . .
> >>But how does this change the fact that y still has 1 more element
> >>than yq? yq is after all, not a circular list.
> >>I don't see why inductio
Bill Wood wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 15:16 +0100, Brian Hulley wrote:
. . .
But how does this change the fact that y still has 1 more element
than yq? yq is after all, not a circular list.
I don't see why induction can't just be applied infinitely to prove
this.
The set of all non-negative
