Philosophy Now Forum

Err no, I denied that the line is a set of 0d points. Take it up with Euclid. Or any modern mathematician. I can't argue this point with you. Did you miss high school math? The real line is composed of an infinite set of 0-dimensional points. You can make up your own math but you'll be denying all ...

Ehh.. Zero times anything is still zero, and the length of the unit is 1. However you simply can't create a 1-dimensional mathematical object from adding 0-dimensional mathematical objects. The saying that a line is 'composed' of points only means that wherever you look on the line, you can assign ...

Ehh.. Zero times anything is still zero, and the length of the unit is 1. However you simply can't create a 1-dimensional mathematical object from adding 0-dimensional mathematical objects. The saying that a line is 'composed' of points only means that wherever you look on the line, you can assign ...

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:40 pm

And tell me what the difference between a dot "•" and a mathematical point "•".

A dot has a positive area. For example a dot made of ink or pixels. A mathematical point has zero size, zero area, zero dimension.

"I understand why you can believe the dot is not meaningful from a traditional stance. However I am not much one for tradition." It's not a dot, it's a mathematical point. It has no internal structure. If you feel otherwise that's your right, but that's not in accordance with usual math. And I'm afr...

How do you account for the length of the unit interval then The unit interval is composed of zero length points and so it cannot ever be longer than zero That does not magically change just because there happens to be an infinite number of them The unit interval is the interval on the real line bet...

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:42 pm

You cannot get one from many zero length points simply because there is an infinite number of them

How do you account for the length of the unit interval then?

By the way I was very impressed by your use of large sized fonts. 1995 was a great year for web design.

I'm not entirely sure what's significant about this in your mind. You can think about the situation in reverse. Start with any isosceles triangle. Any horizontal line between the vertex and the base defines an isosceles trapezoid; and if we imagine an infinite sequence of horizontal lines, each one ...

I understood that! Eod this is a special day indeed. You are stacking an endless sequence of similar trapezoids on top of each other, each one of smaller size than the one below. If the size (measured any way you like) happens to go to zero, then "at infinity" you'd conceptually have a point; that i...

10. And you cannot respond to any of this, because you can't. I can't respond because it's incoherent nonsense. I did respond to surreptitious57 who believes 0 times anything must be 0, be it 0 times infinity, 0 times fish, 0 times the Mormon Tabernacle choir. I gave the counterexample that an infi...

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 15, 2019 4:57 pm

Ball is in your court.

My mathematical comments have not been directed to you.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 15, 2019 9:49 am

A point has no length until it projects, the point as projective is a length through the line. To argue a line is composed of infinite points necessitates it as infinite lines as infinity times zero is 0.

You're talking shoes again.

Anything multiplied by zero is zero since it cannot logically be anything else As what other possible answer is there to infinity times zero other than zero The fact that infinity is not a number is not relevant because the principle also applies to non numbers There is not a single thing that does...

if infinity could be understood as a number that is... -Imp What number is it being understood as? 6? Well then yes 0 times 6 is 0. But "infinity" is not a number. Now it's true that there are transfinite cardinals and ordinals, but none of them are called "infinity". If fish were a number then 0 t...

zero times infinity is zero No. if infinity could be understood as a number that is... -Imp What number is it being understood as? 6? Well then yes 0 times 6 is 0. But "infinity" is not a number. Now it's true that there are transfinite cardinals and ordinals, but none of them are called "infinity"...