"The Groundlessness of Infinity" and the false FLT

Got a great idea? Tell the world about it here.

Moderators: mvs_staff, forum_admin, Marilyn

Re: "The Groundlessness of Infinity" and the false FLT

Postby Emmanuel Xagorarakis » Thu Sep 01, 2016 1:29 pm

Dear Albert,

I thank you and I accept your comment on discreteness.

But, kindly, please read the book thorougly, so that you have the complete (and absolutely valid) idea AND also realise that in the last 2 pages, after the epilogue, I have included 27 bibliograpic references by giants of mathematics and the philosophy of mathmatics. As for specific names in the history of mathematics, the ones I have included are no smaller than the ones you mentioned, and moreover they are the ones whose thought is worth the reference for my thought.

I'm generally thankful for your interest and rigor in seing something new in science.

Emmanuel Xagorarakis
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 3:29 pm

Re: "The Groundlessness of Infinity" and the false FLT

Postby Albert 2016 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 1:56 am

Hi Emmanuel,

And thanks a lot for your clarification.
Yes, I did not read carefully your work at the end, I apologize. I admit you actually have included the references with authors and their works.

However, my misunderstanding arose because I didn’t find names in your TEXT.
Usually, when I’m (and others are) writing about ideas and statements by an author (say Max Planck), then I write in my text: “Max Planck said/wrote/did this and that” and then I put a reference number (example [15]) at the end of the sentence.

Your style is different. You never mention the names of the authors you’re discussing.
For instance, here (p.23) you wrote:

“So, “compose” is identified with what we call quantity or number. What’s more, the
verb which comes out of the noun “number” –numerate– is of the same meaning
with “compose”, for the composition (or composing), that is synthesis, is a number,
a quantity of entities. Or, to say better, it is the quantity that accompanies entities
Then, if I go to the reference, at number [9], I can discover the name of Immanuel Kant, and his well-known major work: “The Critique of the Pure Reason”.
That’s OK, but if you don’t mention the name of Kant in your text, and you don’t say in text what’s the difference between his ideas and yours, I – as a reader – cannot distinguish the difference between Kant ideas and yours.

Moreover, if you don’t mention the names in your text, I – as a reader – cannot understand whether you agree with Kant, or maybe there is just a little difference in your ideas, or you totally disagree.

Kant in his work called the “composition” 5 + 7 = 12 “a priori judgment”, and he said that both mathematics and physics are based on these concepts.
Do you agree with Kant for both mathematics and physics? Because it seems to me that you agree with respect to math, but not to physics, it is not so clear to me.
So, normally in scientific texts, articles, studies, etc., those who write are always mentioning names in their texts, and then they immediately say whether they agree, disagree, etc., with authors they mentioned.

And finally, as you are Greek, I was expecting from your book a full comment about Platonism in mathematics. For Plato abstract mathematical objects (numbers) exist independently of us, and that was widely debated by mathematicians as Gödel (who was in favor of the continuum hypothesis) and others.

Thanks a lot for your kind attention.


Albert 2016
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 4:54 am

Re: "The Groundlessness of Infinity" and the false FLT

Postby Emmanuel Xagorarakis » Fri Sep 02, 2016 7:55 am

Hi Alberto,

Yes, although I include serious and valid references, I don't offer the direct comparison of my thought to that of others. The reason for this is that my agruments/proofs are based on the completely elementary notions (i.e. the arithmetical identity) and I offer new ideas indeed. If at least one of my proofs was based on another author's work, the direct reference and comparison would be needed. As to this, the references I include are only accompanying, although they're by important authors. One can only understand this if he/she reads my work thoroughly and masters it.

Thanks for your kind attention.

Emmanuel Xagorarakis
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 3:29 pm


Return to Great Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests