Ham

So why can't I develop a few real, genuine friendships without joining another damned cult.. or founding one.. or being an administrative assistant of one.. or enabling one.. or whatever. maybe it is because I am asking for far, far too much.

the problem with Kronecker's public railing against the Transfinite Numbers. They were not exactly numbers, to begin with They were more descriptions of the properties of subsets of numbers.. the first one is Aleph null. That one describes the set of Natural Numbers, or the counting numbers.. Its a frigging description. Not an exact quantity..

Some Religious Folk thought Cantor's work to be Blasphemy.. but it was the wrong era. They didn't exactly succeed in raising religous persecution and such. Cantor held the belief that God revealed to him the Transfinite Numbers. what are Transfinite numbers anyway.. anybody want to know? This was a development in the 1800's. I mean.. come on. Great great gramps can't be so smart that we can't understand him, can he? The actual mechanics behind the theory is really pretty easy to agree on.. if one can find a one to one correspondence between sets, no matter how different they might be.. one has then shown than one set is equivalent to the other.. if you want the english version, I will give it.

This is among some of the great secrets of the Universe.. Man, reluctantly raises his head above the mire of society, and sees, and maybe even understands the nature of the first infinity.. hey.. the Greeks didn't dare go there. Archimedes probably knew more, but wasn't inclined to say.. now we are talking technology long before the 1800's..

This one also has a couple of numbers.. 1967, and 19..

We've already lost a hand full of numbers, and in the final tally it has made no difference..

Hey.. if you want something completely different. May I suggest: Yes, I've listened to this on multiple occasions.

Ha! That is the real question: and the Answer: because their home is not *neat* enough..

So, what if we just re-named numbers, and just gave them a different label. Instead of 1, we call it 1 squared, which is 1. Instead of 2, we call it 2 squared, which is 4. Instead of 3, we call it 3 squared, which is 9. Here is where the problem (question number one) exists. We've skipped over a lot of numbers so far.. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8.. but these sets STILL have the same number of members.

This is where Cantor was brilliant. Of course, Kronecker persecuted Cantor, not to Cantor's grave, but to Kroneckers. Kronecker described one of the greatest minds of the 19th century as a mathematical charlatan, a corrupter of the youth.. Kronecker was a dull little bastard. Well, he showed a little brilliance, from time to time..

So nobody wants to attempt to answer the first question. For shame, for shame..

And you are intelligent, superb, priceless human beings. Except for the one who requested No Contact. I can respect that.. sorry, it is Weird Squirrel Night. Hey! it's Tuesday, Afternoon..

Another thread for my dear friend..

brought to the top, in case a dear friend here needs to find it.

Maybe a hint. Any set one can list in a Roster is countable. That is, there is the first element, the second, the third, etc. Don't say this is too hard. This is 1800's technology. We are in what now.. 213 give or take a few years past all of that..

So one is confronted with different sets of numbers. There are the Natural numbers.. they are called the counting numbers. {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...} and then there are other sets of numbers: the Integers. 0, 1, -1, 2, -2, 3, -3... which set has more numbers, or members? That is the first big question..

First: some vocabulary.. Cardinality: the number of elements in a set A Set: A collection of objects. They can contain any members, usually numbers, for mathematicians. sets can have a finite number of elements, or infinite.. If sets have the same quantity of numbers, they have the same cardinality, by definition. (Maybe!) more to come.. I wish Walter would come here. I know he's seen all of this at least once..

maybe people should consider having home fellowships in homes that are not required to be meticulously neat, and groomed.. so you are going to wait until the kids, the spouse.. the you name it.. is in Perfect Detail. That is not a real home, to begin with.. If you want to come to my home, we will do readings out of Bullinger's Witness of the Stars. That's about all I've got left from my old twi library.. maybe we can do some math or something..

Patton studied at West Point.. MacArthur as well.. vic studied practical theology.. i.e. preaching. The only problem I have with Patton is that he did so poorly first time around with mathematics. Maybe he just didn't find the right instructor or something..

(not my) uncle harry raised skunks for pelts. *Miraculously* he never got sprayed when he picked them up. The whole story is in the little biography book the way used to sell. I do not have it on the book shelf now, it is long gone..

Tarot Cards are more complex. Maybe it depends on the Reader.

I hope it has enough room for the fearful, the terrified.. and here.. the Cats. Bullinger had a lot to say about the Ship. Bullinger had a lot of Victorian .... to sort through here.. Bullinger thinks that there are more Pilgrims than can be counted on the Great Ship..

Who would I absolutely love to see.. Waysider, Belle.. and fer gawd's sake, I could not logically define why. We have a rapidly contracting cosmos. Yeah. It's getting smaller.. and the likelihood of Connedtion is getting less, day by day. and ralphie. gone, dissipated in even more obscurity.. there is a really, really big ship, according to Bullinger.. that we get some passage on.. or do we..maybe it is asking for too much.

No, he didn't take the advanced class either. Not *really*. "black heart, white heart" is so spiritually juvenile.