Re: Ikedaian Cabalism

From: James W Stark (stark2301@voyager.net)
Date: Wed Jun 27 2001 - 17:04:23 EDT

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Ikedaian Cabalism"

    on 6/25/01 9:10 AM, george murphy at gmurphy@raex.com wrote:

    > Tim Ikeda wrote:
    >
    >> ...............................................
    >>
    >> I purposefully skipped the series proofs because I have an irrational fear
    >> that prevents me from even considering infinite series (Well, that and a
    >> problem I have getting the signs of the odd and even terms correct).
    >
    > ................................................
    > This is unfortunate because it probably keeps you from accepting a
    > brilliant proof of the doctrine of _creatio ex nihilo_:
    >
    > 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ....
    > = (1-1) + (1-1) + ....
    > = 0 + 0 + 0 ....
    > = 0
    > 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ....
    > = 1 - (1-1) - (1-1) - ....
    > = 1 - 0 - 0 ....
    > = 1
    > Therefore 0 = 1.
    >
    > Shalom, George

    This "proof" does not appear so brilliant to me.

    In the above proof one has to assume that inserting ( ) and adjusting signs
    does not alter the equivalence of the initial infinite series and that an
    equivalence between infinite series is the same as equal for finite numbers.
    Inserting the ( ) maintains a one to one correspondence needed for
    equivalence. However, you are interpreting 0 = 1 as equals. Isn't this
    misleading? It should not be interpreted as an equality.

    Something out of nothing with finite numbers is often shown from 1 - 1 = 0
    Here we "create" two somethings out of nothing.

    To me _creatio ex nihilo_ is only a convenient assumption for a story.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 27 2001 - 17:08:03 EDT