Infinite numbers are large finite numbers

Authors
Abstract
In this paper, I suggest that infinite numbers are large finite numbers, and that infinite numbers, properly understood, are 1) of the structure omega + (omega* + omega)Ө + omega*, and 2) the part is smaller than the whole. I present an explanation of these claims in terms of epistemic limitations. I then consider the importance, part of which is demonstrating the contradiction that lies at the heart of Cantorian set theory: the natural numbers are too large to be counted by any finite number, but too small to be counted by any infinite number – there is no number of natural numbers.
Keywords Cantor  paradox  infinite
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On Infinite Number and Distance.Jeremy Gwiazda - 2012 - Constructivist Foundations 7 (2):126-130.
Throwing Darts, Time, and the Infinite.Jeremy Gwiazda - 2013 - Erkenntnis 78 (5):971-975.
A Conversation About Numbers and Knowledge.Charles Sayward - 2002 - American Philosophical Quarterly 39 (3):275-287.
What Are Numbers?Zvonimir Šikić - 1996 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10 (2):159-171.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-07-12

Total downloads
459 ( #6,375 of 2,263,202 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
21 ( #18,284 of 2,263,202 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature