Correcting the definition of VALID inference

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 1706
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Correcting the definition of VALID inference

Post by Skepdick » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:08 am

PeteOlcott wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:35 am
You don't really know jack shit. All this set theory stuff is AFU.
The set of all reals is countable knucklehead. Every real corresponds
to an adjacent geometric point on a number line and these are countable.
Shit for brains! I am not the one who has wasted 20 years on this, so pay attention. The sooner you quit - the sooner you get to spend time with your grandkids (or something).

I wasn't talking about the countability of finite sets. I was talking about the countability of relationships between the elements of a finite set. In a full mesh you can draw N(N-1)/2 edges between N vertices. If you sub-partition the set it gets worse.

The English language has 26 reusable letters in the alphabet. How many words can you make with those letters? How many sentences? How many paragraphs? How many books?

The act of counting is physical work - it takes time. Time is a finite resource! The more things you want counted, the more time you need.

If the reals are countable as geometric points then the edges between those points are not countable unless you wave your magic wand and invent more time to iterate with. You are supposed to fucking know this. It's computer science 101 stuff.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests