In Mathematics, The Art Of Asking Questions

Use Campaign Link Tagging Labels All For Specifying Slight Differences In Content For Split Testing.

I Am So In Favor Of The Actual Infinite That Instead Of Admitting That Nature Abhors It, As Is Commonly Said, I Hold That Nature Makes Frequent Use Of It Everywhere, In Order To Show More Effectively The Perfections Of Its Author. Thus I Believe That There Is No Part Of Matter Which Is Not - I Do Not Say Divisible - But Actually Divisible; And Consequently The Least Particle Ought To Be Considered As A World Full Of An Infinity Of Different Creatures.

A Set Is A Many That Allows Itself To Be Thought Of As A One.

The Old And Oft-repeated Proposition "totum Est Majus Sua Parte" [the Whole Is Larger Than The Part] May Be Applied Without Proof Only In The Case Of Entities That Are Based Upon Whole And Part; Then And Only Then Is It An Undeniable Consequence Of The Concepts "totum" And "pars". Unfortunately, However, This "axiom" Is Used Innumerably Often Without Any Basis And In Neglect Of The Necessary Distinction Between "reality" And "quantity", On The One Hand, And "number" And "set", On The Other, Precisely In The Sense In Which It Is Generally False.

The Potential Infinite Means Nothing Other Than An Undetermined, Variable Quantity, Always Remaining Finite, Which Has To Assume Values That Either Become Smaller Than Any Finite Limit No Matter How Small, Or Greater Than Any Finite Limit No Matter How Great.