Re: Zenkin's paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)

From: Jesse F. Hughes (jesse_at_phiwumbda.org)
Date: 11/24/04

  • Next message: Ketil Malde: "Re: Infinite number of people toss a coin infinite times" 
    Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:59:54 +0100

    examachine@gmail.com (Eray Ozkural exa) writes:

    > "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@phiwumbda.org> wrote in message news:<87zn187lzj.fsf@phiwumbda.org>...
    >> So what is the obvious meaning of "size of a set"?
    >
    > I did not say that "size of a set" has an obvious meaning, I said that
    > it is obvious that cardinality must explain "size of a set", or it
    > does not explain anything.

    Cardinality is well-motivated to capture the size of a set. When a
    child counts a collection of pencils, he is creating a bijection
    between an initial segment of N and the set of pencils. For finite
    sets, assigning a size clearly involves a bijection.

    I've seen no reason why this isn't the essence of counting.

    >
    > Since there is the observed antinomy of the infinitely big,
    > unfortunately "size of a set" is far from being an obvious concept.

    What antinomy is that? 

    -- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"Wiles made somewhere around half a million dollars U.S. that I heard
about, and I know he didn't take major endorsements."  
  --JSH on the rewards of proving Fermat's last theorem.
  • Next message: Ketil Malde: "Re: Infinite number of people toss a coin infinite times"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
      ... child counts a collection of pencils, ... between an initial segment of N and the set of pencils. ... assigning a size clearly involves a bijection. ... > Since there is the observed antinomy of the infinitely big, ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
      ... > child counts a collection of pencils, ... > between an initial segment of N and the set of pencils. ... assigning a size clearly involves a bijection. ...
      (comp.theory)
    • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
      ... > child counts a collection of pencils, ... > between an initial segment of N and the set of pencils. ... assigning a size clearly involves a bijection. ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
      ... >> between an initial segment of N and the set of pencils. ... assigning a size clearly involves a bijection. ... This is nonsense, of course. ... It is nonsense on the literal reading because counting does not ...
      (sci.math)
    • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
      ... >> between an initial segment of N and the set of pencils. ... assigning a size clearly involves a bijection. ... This is nonsense, of course. ... It is nonsense on the literal reading because counting does not ...
      (comp.theory)