Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<O1SdnTGNAOqj-VP7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 23:41:50 +0000
Subject: Re: Replacement of Cardinality (book-keeping sign)
Newsgroups: sci.math
References: <hsRF8g6ZiIZRPFaWbZaL2jR1IiU@jntp>
 <maptLlB5uFyelg509mbdgWw1yGc@jntp>
 <980a0ec7476c9dc5823e59b2969398bd39d9b91d@i2pn2.org>
 <va5c09$3vapv$1@dont-email.me> <h6Deptvp2nWZ7A-WxxE_8LCEIYY@jntp>
 <8d5b0145-b30d-44d2-b4ff-b01976f7ca66@att.net>
 <WtY45o_2xWeSk0s5VFpkO7OO7b0@jntp>
 <bd225e98-2fa5-49d5-806e-f25e2c8f24da@att.net>
 <MyfajwdXdoZZDQyGfKtmPKpt08o@jntp>
 <6cc86827-def3-4948-9e69-a3fea9e86c06@att.net>
 <DjlCrzShAlCRQKbykfy5r-LuUt4@jntp> <valm4s$35n22$1@dont-email.me>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 16:41:55 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <valm4s$35n22$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <O1SdnTGNAOqj-VP7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 24
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-YeRyxB8l/5zEzkZLe1hQ8a6NVwIBN0fL/XBbGkD6SLlK+Uu+JBPouHT6uIClg3Xqf00jhb5RRMNQIfm!MABcXM5oSE8vS/abE6a4++yD/9DGCJbGDJs8Blshz5r6XBvqZ1sGeIX38RenK+PuSkOYHCFXlyKc!gA==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 2339

On 08/27/2024 04:06 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> WM wrote :
>> Le 25/08/2024 à 23:18, Jim Burns a écrit :
>>
>>> Therefore,
>>> there is no ω-1,
>>
>> If the set of ordinal numbers is complete, then ω-1 precedes ω - by
>> definition.
>
> What is the definition of subtraction here? Can you subtract past zero
> in the naturals?



You can build a little mound out past ten, say,
then relate that to zero in a sliding scale,
then if you find you can't remember how to roll the clock back,
you can count so many forward howsoever many were lost,
with a bit of book-keeping then it so results,
that the extra cost involved in counting over numbering,
lets you build the integers as deep as they are.