My Math Forum For zylo et al

 Topology Topology Math Forum

 May 28th, 2016, 11:14 AM #1 Senior Member   Joined: Jun 2015 From: England Posts: 764 Thanks: 220 For zylo et al Thanks from greg1313, topsquark and manus Last edited by skipjack; July 9th, 2016 at 04:32 PM.
 July 9th, 2016, 06:49 PM #2 Global Moderator   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,704 Thanks: 1529 Thanks.
 July 10th, 2016, 06:34 PM #3 Math Team   Joined: Jul 2011 From: Texas Posts: 2,723 Thanks: 1376 Scanning that article left a part in my hair ...
 July 14th, 2016, 04:17 AM #4 Senior Member   Joined: Mar 2015 From: New Jersey Posts: 1,297 Thanks: 93 It is trivially wrong. You can't do finite operations on an infinite set and expect a rational result. Cantor makes the same mistake. The only way to draw rational conclusions about infinite sets is to specify explicitly what each member is or use induction.
July 14th, 2016, 05:17 AM   #5
Math Team

Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 1,689
Thanks: 670

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by zylo It is trivially wrong.
A person who has studied the problem for years and has written and published a peer reviewed paper is trivially wrong? Has this ever happened? I could see such a paper to contain a subtle mistake, it's happened plenty of times before, but not a trivial one.

Once again I think you need to review your Mathematics.

-Dan

 July 14th, 2016, 06:45 AM #6 Senior Member   Joined: Mar 2015 From: New Jersey Posts: 1,297 Thanks: 93 Consider the set of natural numbers. Color the 1st red, the 2nd blue, the 3rd red, the 4th blue, and so on, alternately. Obviously the number of reds and blues are equal. Right?

 Tags zylo

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post zylo Topology 29 March 8th, 2016 07:27 AM zylo Topology 53 February 1st, 2016 10:56 AM zylo Math 3 January 21st, 2016 12:03 AM zylo Math 16 January 20th, 2016 01:12 PM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top