You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Proof there are an infinite number of prime numbers
Steve Patterson destroys the idea that there are infinite sets here: http://steve-patterson.com/cantor-wrong-no-infinite-sets/
Steve Patterson destroys the idea that there are infinite sets here: http://steve-patterson.com/cantor-wrong-no-infinite-sets/
I started reading it but stop because well it is long and I know where this wasgoing. The author didn't do much of analysis because he would have to "kill himself" from "apparent contradiction overload". I am not saying it is obvious and I am not saying I agree with everything that lie in the border of maths logical. I am just "not impress" by such an article.
It's a bit of semantics based on whether concepts can be said to actually exist or not. But mathematicians simply define existence in such a way that they do. I can accept, as in his article on Zeno's Paradox, that there are no physical infinities. I agree with this talk by George Ellis: