Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 19:49:51 +0000 Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit fractions? (infinitary) Newsgroups: sci.math References: <88e6a631-417a-4dd0-9443-a57116dcbd28@att.net> <7a1e34df-ffee-4d30-ae8c-2af5bcb1d932@att.net> <6a90a2e2-a4fa-4a8d-83e9-2e451fa8dd51@att.net> <30dffbdf129483f7b61e3284d1e7bf2ad2e5ea16@i2pn2.org> <9ca97f4a24ae1e3041583265125cf860d2fada11@i2pn2.org> <30f7c3c7-606e-4fd6-80d7-a89a41e368e9@att.net> From: Ross Finlayson Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 12:50:00 -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: <30f7c3c7-606e-4fd6-80d7-a89a41e368e9@att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Lines: 56 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-rsVSHn5L+uj0xizpknBhdTMTA9sZJMiuFRKfWXLaBlHgFP8mUxHmpQ5uJtpU9OOdY0G61fumutBUCBw!aAmFmrWho2xe4Rk8+hQEO0OxkO70WHt81k2YJ/PbP1XRdSKbXpV3F0qmCDDoQir68ECDSHgashZL 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: 3694 On 11/01/2024 08:04 AM, Jim Burns wrote: > On 11/1/2024 7:38 AM, WM wrote: >> On 01.11.2024 11:57, FromTheRafters wrote: > >>> [...] >> >> Actual means that all are there, >> including the smallest. > > Claims like "The ordinals exists" > work oppositely from how you think they work. > > If I claim "The ordinals exist", then > I don't expand the universe to the ordinals. > I contract our discourse to the ordinals. > > > Normally (without magic spells), > talking about stuff doesn't change stuff. > However, > we can change _what we're talking about_ > by saying "We're talking about _this_ stuff". > > Here, > you say: the smallest exists. > That does not pop the smallest into existence. > > It contracts our discourse to > lines which have a smallest. > But, > when we look at what else we know about lines, > we also know that _there is no smallest_ > You have contracted our discourse to > lines which _do and don't_ have a smallest. > You have contracted our discourse until > nothing exists which we are talking about. > However math.like it sounds, > talk with no referents is gibberish. > >> Why? >> It is a point on the real line, >> well separated from its neighbour. > > You can contract our discourse to > real lines with smallest points, > but they will also be > real lines without smallest points, > which makes our discourse gibberish. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fnnGzDlslQ&t=600 "Moment and Motion: ...".