The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsm...@gmail.com>
Date: 30 Jun 2006 10:07:37 -0700
Local: Fri, Jun 30 2006 1:07 pm
Subject: Re: Is magnitude more fundamental than the real numbers?
Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com wrote: > Hi. I answer the above in the affirmative. I'm curious what you think. I think magnitude basically *is* the real numbers, since the absolute value takes values in the non-negative reals for not only the reals, but many other fields besides. > I have a mathematical I've pointed out several times that you do not have such a > construction reliant upon magnitude that defines the reals (P2) and > complex numbers(P3) . construction. I'll repeat it: you have NOT constructed the reals. This is because your definition requires that the reals have already been constructed. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||