- #176
Lama
- 467
- 0
a) Godel's incompleteness theorem.
b) The limit concept
c) the universal quantification concept.
d) The inifinty concept.
b) The limit concept
c) the universal quantification concept.
d) The inifinty concept.
Please demostrate your arguments by showing side by side my definitions and the standard definitions, that by your argument have the same interpretations of mine (to post #176 concepts) but in simpler ways.kaiser soze said:and in any case they can be expressed or defined using simpler terms than your explanations;
1 as the limit of the sequence 0.9,0.99,0.999,0.9999,0.99999,... is based on an ill intuition about a collection of infinitely many elements that can be found in infinitely many different scales, as can be clearly understood by posts #190,#191,#192.kaiser soze said:If you do not see that the limit of the sequence I provided is 1, then you do not understand what a limit is, and therefore can not agree or disagree with its definition.
"getting close" is reasonable.terrabyte said:...getting infinitely close...
There is no 'own definition' in the first place; therefore there is no paradox.Moscowjade said:The paradox lies in the perception of non-existence, which by its own definition, cannot exist.
Lama said:Hi arildno,
No, I did not read any of Hegel's work.
Thank you for the information, I'll try to find an English version of it.
Can you give us some example, which shows the similarity between Hegel's work and my ideas?
Thank you.
Lama