
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. 
Today, 05:30 AM  #561 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,259

You have missed my correction in http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=559 and replied to an irrelevant post.

__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

Today, 05:56 AM  #562 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,939


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

Today, 06:05 AM  #563 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,259

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=559 is a new post, where you replied to the older one.

__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

Today, 06:15 AM  #564 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,939

No, it was not a new post. It was an substantial edit to an existing post.
And I replied to the version of the post in place at the time I hit the Quote button. It is rude for you to dismiss my post in its entirety, too. If it comments on mistakes of yours that have been corrected, point out in response to my post how your mistakes were corrected. If it comments on things you thought were correct in the first place, comment on that. I await the mitigation to your rudeness. 
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

Today, 06:30 AM  #565 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,259

jsfisher your post was created almost two hours after my new post was created.
So next time please refresh your screen before you reply. Please reply to http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=559. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

Today, 06:44 AM  #566 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,259

Originally Posted by jsfisher

__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

Today, 07:33 AM  #567 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,259

The relevant details are as follows:
jsfisher, in order to establish the minimal set satisfying the requirements of the Axiom of Infinity, one first has to show that all the natural numbers (which are defined by von Neumann's treatment of the natural numbers in terms of sets) are actually establish a set that satisfying the requirements of the Axiom of Infinity. So at the first stage the following definitions are restricted only to all the members of this minimal set, such that the initial member is the empty set (v=∅) and the rest of the members are defined as v⋃{v}, which are all finite sets: Definition 1: v = v iff there is bijection from v to v. Definition 2: v < v⋃{v} iff (there is an injective nonsurjective function from v to v⋃{v}) OR (injective function from v to v⋃{v} that is based on empty function) (in case that v=Ø) Definitions 1 and 2 look trivial at first glance, but these are the functions among the finite sets, which define all the natural numbers by von Neumann's treatment. Since ∀v ∈ V(v∪{v} ∈ V ∧ v∪{v} can't be but < V) V is not established, simply because it can't be defined as the cardinality of all V members, which are all the finite sets by von Neumann's treatment of all the natural numbers. 
__________________
That is also over the matrix, is aware of the matrix. That is under the matrix, is unaware of the matrix. For more details, please carefully observe Prof. Edward Frenkel's video from https://youtu.be/PFkZGpN4wmM?t=697 until the end of the video. 

Today, 08:11 AM  #568 
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,939


__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group. "He's the greatest mod that never was!"  Monketey Ghost 

Bookmarks 
Thread Tools  

