To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 1770
1769  |  1771
Subject: 
Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate
Followup-To: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:02:54 GMT
Reply-To: 
lpieniazek@novera.comANTISPAM
Viewed: 
41 times
  
Do put your oar in Simon, I think you're making some good points

Simon Robinson wrote:


I'd agree that Larry is technically correct about numbers and infinities - but
I'm dubious about his claim that all that theory shows
that we understand infinities. In my experience
the more I studied number theory and logic theory the less convinced I
became that I actually understood what was going on - even when could
work through the proofs line by line and know why each individual step worked
there always seemed to be something deeper that was escaping me.

Knowing deep in your inner being what something means, and being able to
use it to make predictions, are two different things. I won't pretend to
understand quanta, or infinities, or even the concept of a line, which
has only one dimension. But that does not prevent us from using them in
useful ways. Which is what you're saying below....

<so I snipped it>

What I am getting on about the nature of theology is that christian
theology (not all theology, mind you, but this specific one) doesn't
make any useful predictions. If it make no predictions, it's not
verifiable and it's not useful

Things aren't clear cut either way on the religious/secular debate. Shame
in most of these debates, so many people on BOTH sides make statements
without thinking through the consequences of what they are saying, and/or
argue by putting up straw men[B] (This debate has been more sensible than
some I've seen, but even so, from what I've read I'd say Larry and John N
are both guilty on both counts) (Sorry guys! <grin>)

Feel free to call me on those, as I've said, to be an atheist is
difficult. It requires deep thought!... and I'm a big advocate of
accepting the consequences for your actions or statements. Further, I
certainly don't intend to erect straw men. The real thing is flimsy
enough.

Followup set back to .debate

--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com  http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.

NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes: <Massive snip> (...) You mean the transcendental numbers, presumably? I seem to recall reading that practically every number along the real number line is transcendental, with just odd blips where you (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

277 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR