Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Another proof: The Halting Problem Is Undecidable.
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 09:53:49 +0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <9810f381018797df92f66066e96a63386071658b.camel@gmail.com>
References: <789da1c7da825d24f5298891efae209a44535ca5.camel@gmail.com>
	 <0cf5c2dd4c7f1042c1d52ea45a30847ea4bc3e38.camel@gmail.com>
	 <veaved$3jher$1@dont-email.me>
	 <bd415cc46f2a87bb642028be2e99b999e8c7c6fd.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vec20n$3jher$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 03:53:50 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8829f17768153cab3daf317b51752472";
	logging-data="10912"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+814p9VTmp7dsTtDUhwK+j"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.2 (3.50.2-1.fc39)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2oAru9QoDAqIov27gUnXfQjA/74=
In-Reply-To: <vec20n$3jher$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2573

On Fri, 2024-10-11 at 21:32 +0100, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 11/10/2024 18:11, wij wrote:
> > Archimedes likely believes that all (real) numbers, including pi, sqrt(=
2), are
> > p/q representable. Is that what you suggest?
>=20
> 	By the time of Archimedes it had been known for several hundred
> years that "sqrt(2)" is irrational.=C2=A0 [The status of "pi" remained un=
known
> for a further ~2K years.]=C2=A0 So no, Archimedes did not believe that, n=
ot
> least when he laid some of the foundations of calculus.

That is a fabrication (there are many, but... accepted, as a fabrication)

> > Archimedean axiom is an *assertion* that infinitesimal does not exist w=
ithout
> > knowing the consequence (violating Wij's Theorem which is provable from=
 the rules
> > stronger than 'assertion').
>=20
> 	If "Wij's Theorem" is inconsistent with the axioms of real numbers,
> then it is not a theorem of real numbers.=C2=A0 Try one of the other syst=
ems of
> numbers, which you would probably find more to your taste, given the othe=
r
> things you say in this group.

Are you kidding? "x>0 iff x/n >0, where n=E2=88=88=E2=84=A4=E2=81=BA" is in=
consistent? With your real, yes.

My real is based on the abacus that can be physically modeled. Tell me, how=
 can=20
it be inconsistent?=20