Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
557 online now:
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,023 Year: 4,135/6,534 Month: 349/900 Week: 55/150 Day: 28/27 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Mystery of the Aleph
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 4260 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 1 of 2 (38597)
05-01-2003 11:50 AM


The Mystery of the Aleph

If there is any mystery of it it is how Dauben(1990) pawned off the pschological aspects of infinity between any experimental philosophy of pure and applied Science the math of which was Natural Philosophy for Boscovich to which BOTH Tesla's "biological symptom," and as usuall I lost a thought here.
B. Russel gave Bolazano a sound bite "The first to generalize this property of infinite collections, and to treat it as not contradictory,was, so far as I know, Bolzano or in dreams, I say the solid gournd and base as well as a smooth path are absolutely necessary for secure travelling or wandering, a path which never breaks offm bot one which must be and remain passable where ver the journey leads"p127 and p292 "Based upon his studies concerning the inherence of point sets (chapter 7), he could then determuine P=Pr +Pi1. Since P was the first power, there were no other inherences, but for the set of greater cardinality: Q=Qr +Qi1 +Qi2. Various subdivisions were also possible, and Cantor suggested that with the inherences Pi1, Qi1, Qi2, these might suffice (Telsa's balance neutralizable??) to explain seperately or in various combinations distinct properties of matter, including differences in composition, chemical properties, and such phenomena aslight heat electricity and magnetisism." Russel simply new no such applicaiton of bioinformatics then existed but Amir D. Aczel merely conflicts Gould's architetural spanderlized token of bio-change with the inheritance of Cantor's estate for the body of Tesla's brother.even as Boscovich would write in a Galelian summary "My reason, as cen be seen from what I have said, was twofold; in the first place, the nature of my theme ;is one that is not only not unsuitable, but it is suitable in a high degree, for the consideation of a Christian priest:..."

Childs thought as well as Aczel on Godel's Shakesperian Liebniz as to the true continuous authorization that Maxwell was incorrect to weigh lay Boscovich against Lienniz but if Liebinz was not the authre and Faraday studied Boscovich then Cantor could indeed without Dedekind found Mayr's founder in the population thinking of this change in space that discussion of continuity engenders. It does seem to me that the vulgar opnion of Darwin without a bioentropism adaptively disqulifies both Child and Aczel as narrators but does not show how the point sets MUST be transfinitely if at a certian number of recominant DNAs concerned . Electrotonics could indeed be but THROWN point sets into the set theory of large cardinals however without the ordinal noun this suspect for any word that attempted to account for the non-wellordered thought of Coehn and Collet. The well ordiering of Tesla rather than the discontinous film of Wolfram seems perferable but then I speak like the last two when not the first ones.

The book is not as bad as I first thought and contributes to what I consider to be Mendel's issue of "fluctuation" and in that topic is germain when not mainly OK compared to Russel. I too was struck that it was actually possible to talk about the 2nd principle of generation but I fail to understand why mathematically minded biologists such as Simon Levin back down from such discussions. I just do not see why JD Murray brand of theoretical biology or Gould's penmanship of Kaufmann's on Thompson is referable to Wiesaker's UR delta or Hoffman QMs but maybe it is just that some things still we can not divide even though we have the tools to bring a critical mass of workers under one labour. If Edelman's cell collectives are ARITHMETICALLY determined the wait is over but then again I hear mathematically that maybe a sphere is not the format of noholes nonbarred 3-D default shape. So again the color of Mendel's pea is key. Boscovich made normal what Newton had remained offset to which Tesla noted another intesity to which Ican not tell outside of population genetics is an artefact of technology only.

Referenced to Review-

THE MYSTERY OF THE ALEPH : Mathematics, the Kabbalah, and the Search for Infinity
Author--Amir D. Aczel; Publiher-- Washington Square Press by Pocket Books: New York
2000 ISBN 0-7434-2299-6 Two Hundred and Fifty Eight pages.

Boscovich, Roger Joseph 1966, A Theory of Natural Philosophy The M.I.T. Press Cambridge
Dauben Joseph Warren 1990 Georg Cantor His Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite Princeton
Russel Bertrand 1931 Principles Of Mathmatics WW Norton&Company INC New York
Tesla, Nikola 1982 My Inventions Hart Brothers:Williston, Vermont
Quine, Willard Van Orman 1969 Set Theory and Its Logic The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press

[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 05-01-2003]


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Brad McFall, posted 05-01-2003 11:54 AM Brad McFall has taken no action

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 4260 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 2 of 2 (38599)
05-01-2003 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Brad McFall
05-01-2003 11:50 AM


parser will not accept this text
The Mystery of the Aleph

If there is any mystery of it it is how Dauben(1990) pawned off the pschological aspects of infinity between any experimental philosophy of pure and applied Science the math of which was Natural Philosophy for Boscovich to which BOTH Tesla's "biological symptom," and as usuall I lost a thought here.
B. Russel gave Bolazano a sound bite "The first to generalize this property of infinite collections, and to treat it as not contradictory,was, so far as I know, Bolzano or in dreams, I say the solid gournd and base as well as a smooth path are absolutely necessary for secure travelling or wandering, a path which never breaks offm bot one which must be and remain passable where ver the journey leads"p127 and p292 "Based upon his studies concerning the inherence of point sets (chapter 7), he could then determuine P=Pr +Pi1. Since P was the first power, there were no other inherences, but for the set of greater cardinality: Q=Qr +Qi1 +Qi2. Various subdivisions were also possible, and Cantor suggested that with the inherences Pi1, Qi1, Qi2, these might suffice (Telsa's balance neutralizable??) to explain seperately or in various combinations distinct properties of matter, including differences in composition, chemical properties, and such phenomena aslight heat electricity and magnetisism." Russel simply new no such applicaiton of bioinformatics then existed but Amir D. Aczel merely conflicts Gould's architetural spanderlized token of bio-change with the inheritance of Cantor's estate for the body of Tesla's brother.even as Boscovich would write in a Galelian summary "My reason, as cen be seen from what I have said, was twofold; in the first place, the nature of my theme ;is one that is not only not unsuitable, but it is suitable in a high degree, for the consideation of a Christian priest:..."

Childs thought as well as Aczel on Godel's Shakesperian Liebniz as to the true continuous authorization that Maxwell was incorrect to weigh lay Boscovich against Lienniz but if Liebinz was not the authre and Faraday studied Boscovich then Cantor could indeed without Dedekind found Mayr's founder in the population thinking of this change in space that discussion of continuity engenders. It does seem to me that the vulgar opnion of Darwin without a bioentropism adaptively disqulifies both Child and Aczel as narrators but does not show how the point sets MUST be transfinitely if at a certian number of recominant DNAs concerned . Electrotonics could indeed be but THROWN point sets into the set theory of large cardinals however without the ordinal noun this suspect for any word that attempted to account for the non-wellordered thought of Coehn and Collet. The well ordiering of Tesla rather than the discontinous film of Wolfram seems perferable but then I speak like the last two when not the first ones.

The book is not as bad as I first thought and contributes to what I consider to be Mendel's issue of "fluctuation" and in that topic is germain when not mainly OK compared to Russel. I too was struck that it was actually possible to talk about the 2nd principle of generation but I fail to understand why mathematically minded biologists such as Simon Levin back down from such discussions. I just do not see why JD Murray brand of theoretical biology or Gould's penmanship of Kaufmann's on Thompson is referable to Wiesaker's UR delta or Hoffman QMs but maybe it is just that some things still we can not divide even though we have the tools to bring a critical mass of workers under one labour. If Edelman's cell collectives are ARITHMETICALLY determined the wait is over but then again I hear mathematically that maybe a sphere is not the format of noholes nonbarred 3-D default shape. So again the color of Mendel's pea is key. Boscovich made normal what Newton had remained offset to which Tesla noted another intesity to which Ican not tell outside of population genetics is an artefact of technology only.

Referenced to Review-

THE MYSTERY OF THE ALEPH : Mathematics, the Kabbalah, and the Search for Infinity
Author--Amir D. Aczel; Publiher-- Washington Square Press by Pocket Books: New York
2000 ISBN 0-7434-2299-6 Two Hundred and Fifty Eight pages.

Boscovich, Roger Joseph 1966, A Theory of Natural Philosophy The M.I.T. Press Cambridge
Dauben Joseph Warren 1990 Georg Cantor His Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite Princeton
Russel Bertrand 1931 Principles Of Mathmatics WW Norton&Company INC New York
Tesla, Nikola 1982 My Inventions Hart Brothers:Williston, Vermont
Quine, Willard Van Orman 1969 Set Theory and Its Logic The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Brad McFall, posted 05-01-2003 11:50 AM Brad McFall has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022