/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5648377
> because there's no perfect ruler
That's a cop-out answer. The perfect ruler is the so-called construction of the reals. Except that that ruler can't be provided.

The fact that it can't be provided is not the fault of the finitist. Attempting to shift the burden of proof is clever, but not clever enough.

>>5648383
Do you think finitism needs a case? Why, exactly? (Well, as exactly as 4chan allows.).
> why not just solve problems and come up with new theorems and shit
I don't have a problem with theorems. I have a problem with the semantics involved with infinity.
>>5648385
> tldr 0.000.... 1 doesn't come kiddo
No doubt. But the fault is yours: without finitism, the "..." is not well-defined.

> to all
the rest are not responses to me unless I missed one. PS - jihadwatcher is seriously 10/10 to me, I am fucking pathetic