### Re: dilberts hotel

Posted:

**Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:04 am**Page **11** of **16**

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:04 am**

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:08 am**

correct, it has elements removed

correct, it is a complete set

no, you just lack the ability to understand basic logic

gibberish

no, you just did, and you again also assume infinity is a value

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:10 am**

So if you want to claim "The only restrictions on this metaphysical system are that all mathematical concepts must be devoid of internal contradiction," is at odds with "metaphysical freedom" don't frame it as if you want to avoid " internal contradiction".

Be brave enough to admit to being nonsensical. Stop hiding behind false reason...

Be brave enough to admit to being nonsensical. Stop hiding behind false reason...

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:11 am**

jliat wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:10 amSo if you want to claim "The only restrictions on this metaphysical system are that all mathematical concepts must be devoid of internal contradiction," is at odds with "metaphysical freedom" don't frame it as if you want to avoid " internal contradiction".

Be brave enough to admit to being nonsensical. Stop hiding behind false reason...

oh wow james, you are getting senile

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:13 am**

Not correct acording to you!

So you are saying that all the odd numbers are infinite despite not having any of the even numbers.

Contradiction - QED.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:29 am

sure, why not?its an infinite subset of "numbers"

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:14 am**

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:16 am**

So thought by those who cant see the logic...

in which you gave two sets - one finite, one infinite, and different by 1.

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:17 am**

if you think quoting you is the case, you got problems...killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:11 amjliat wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:10 amSo if you want to claim "The only restrictions on this metaphysical system are that all mathematical concepts must be devoid of internal contradiction," is at odds with "metaphysical freedom" don't frame it as if you want to avoid " internal contradiction".

Be brave enough to admit to being nonsensical. Stop hiding behind false reason...

oh wow james, you are getting senile

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:19 am**

calm down old man, the set of [whole numbers - "odd numbers"] is clearly not infinite, it has elements removed, but the set [odd numbers] is intact and therefore infinitejliat wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:13 amNot correct acording to you!

So you are saying that all the odd numbers are infinite despite not having any of the even numbers.

no, you are

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:20 am**

Then why try to use subtraction from an infinite set to prove something? That's maths Daric.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:01 am

math is the polar opposite of metaphysical freedom, cantor was an idiot, and so are his students

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:22 am**

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:23 am**

jliat wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:20 amThen why try to use subtraction from an infinite set to prove something? That's maths Daric.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:01 am

math is the polar opposite of metaphysical freedom, cantor was an idiot, and so are his students

you are really off it today, had a fight with the wife?

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:26 am**

You slipped up - "the set of [whole numbers - "even numbers"] is clearly not infinite," yet is identical to the set of odd numbers which you say is infinite.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:19 am

, the set of [whole numbers - "odd numbers"] is clearly not infinite, it has elements removed, but the set [odd numbers] is intact and therefore infinite

So you are saying the set of odd numbers is not the same as the set of odd numbers .

That's a contradiction...

3 <> (6-3) Durrrrrrr.

You also say that adding to a set makes it not infinite, so adding the set of whole even numbers to the set of odd even numbers makes a finite set and not the infinite set of whole numbers...

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:27 am**

You are on safer ground trying to be insulting.... i would stay there...killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:23 amjliat wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:20 amThen why try to use subtraction from an infinite set to prove something? That's maths Daric.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:01 am

math is the polar opposite of metaphysical freedom, cantor was an idiot, and so are his students

you are really off it today, had a fight with the wife?

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:35 am**

i slipped up? do you think this is another "gotcha" moment? you must be starvingjliat wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:26 amYou slipped up - "the set of [whole numbers - "even numbers"] is clearly not infinite," yet is identical to the set of odd numbers which you say is infinite.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:19 am

, the set of [whole numbers - "odd numbers"] is clearly not infinite, it has elements removed, but the set [odd numbers] is intact and therefore infinite

So you are saying the set of odd numbers is not the same as the set of odd numbers .

the set [whole numbers - "even numbers"] is incomplete, not infinite, the set [odd numbers] is complete therefore infinite

no, you are

we used to sell tickets to watch james try math but nobody would give a pence

wrong again, if anything can be added to a set it is incomplete, if your set of [even numbers] and [odd numbers] need to be added to form all [whole numbers], then your set of [whole numbers] wasnt infinite, in this case it contained no elements before you added them