POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : I haven't read the entire paper yet, but the analogies are rather apt : Re: I haven't read the entire paper yet, but the analogies are ratherapt Server Time
4 Sep 2024 03:21:31 EDT (-0400)
  Re: I haven't read the entire paper yet, but the analogies are ratherapt  
From: nemesis
Date: 11 Dec 2010 22:05:00
Message: <web.4d043ab379f9aefa3128e360@news.povray.org>
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 11/12/2010 03:08 PM, Darren New wrote:
> > Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> >> anybody studies them - set theory, number theory, category theory, etc.)
> >
> > Set theory is how you prove arithmetic works. Prove 2+3=5.
>
> I didn't say that set theory is not *important*. I said it is not
> *interesting*. Certainly not to me, anyway. The obvious stuff is
> obvious, and the non-obvious stuff is all tedious riddle-like splitting
> of hairs rather than interesting insights.
>
> Also, several sources state that set theory is the fundamental basis of
> all of modern mathematics, but not one single one makes any attempt to
> explain this sweeping statement. Your assertion that set theory somehow
> has something vaguely to do with arithmetic is typical of this type of
> statement. If there *is* some kind of connection between set theory and
> arithmetic, it is highly non-obvious.

suppose you have a set of 2 things and a set of 3 things.  How many things you
have in total?  Is that not how you even learn basic arithmetic?

functions?  a formula mapping things from a set to things from another set?

yeah, set theory is fucking huge.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.