[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>>>>>>>> weren't around or didn't have a computer or didn't have   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> a copy of Zork. It's a text-based adventure.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> So, I suppose there may be other reasons, though here there's   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> that all the reasons and none sort of result at least one.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I imagine if you let Kosmanson go on then there'd   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> be quite more to it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> A note about Kosmanson's emphasis on what's often truncated   
   >>>>>>>>>>> in an   
   >>>>>>>>>>> infinite series. A year or so back I was forming baby   
   >>>>>>>>>>> problems in a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> blog   
   >>>>>>>>>>> for a Linux newsgroup frequenters to solve, and in one of   
   >>>>>>>>>>> them one   
   >>>>>>>>>>> would   
   >>>>>>>>>>> begin with a correct equation, would make correct changes in it,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> but   
   >>>>>>>>>>> would end up in an obviously wrong equation :) Nobody solved   
   >>>>>>>>>>> it of   
   >>>>>>>>>>> course (audience were mostly morons). But I now wonder if that   
   >>>>>>>>>>> problem   
   >>>>>>>>>>> had something about Kosmanson's concerns about handling   
   >>>>>>>>>>> infinities.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Here I quote the part of the blog that contained that problem:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> (beginning of the quote)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>    "Then, swoooooooshhshsh!.... and Jesus and all that intense   
   >>>>>>>>>>> light   
   >>>>>>>>>>> went   
   >>>>>>>>>>> back up and out of there. Physfit looked up and there wasn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>> even an   
   >>>>>>>>>>> opening in the ceiling anymore. But now for some reason he was   
   >>>>>>>>>>> horizontally on the floor, in his bed. Right in the living room!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> He thought a bit about what was happening, when he found himself   
   >>>>>>>>>>> quite   
   >>>>>>>>>>> hungry. Last time he had eaten anything was the night before   
   >>>>>>>>>>> he had   
   >>>>>>>>>>> waken up on the summit of the magic mountain in an urban Dallas   
   >>>>>>>>>>> area.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> He thought to himself, "I'm going to assume that more than 48   
   >>>>>>>>>>> hours has   
   >>>>>>>>>>> passed since. So got up and walked to the kitchen and took a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> look   
   >>>>>>>>>>> inside   
   >>>>>>>>>>> refrigerator. There was nothing there but the cat food he had   
   >>>>>>>>>>> cooked on   
   >>>>>>>>>>> the day he first saw the magic mountain. He got on the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> computer to   
   >>>>>>>>>>> order   
   >>>>>>>>>>> something zesty from HelloFresh. After choosing the closest to a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> healthy   
   >>>>>>>>>>> nice pre-agricultural food kit, he clicked, "Go to checkout"   
   >>>>>>>>>>> button,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> after which the computer waited for a few seconds but instead of   
   >>>>>>>>>>> getting   
   >>>>>>>>>>> to the check out screen, a screen came up to make sure   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Physfit was   
   >>>>>>>>>>> not a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> robot. It had a simple question that he had to give it the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> correct   
   >>>>>>>>>>> answer, otherwise food nommo.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The question went like this:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      "In math, is there a difference between the two numbers   
   >>>>>>>>>>> 0.999999...   
   >>>>>>>>>>> and 1 ?"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The digits of "9" continued forever to the right of the radix   
   >>>>>>>>>>> point. So   
   >>>>>>>>>>> of course, Physfit clicked on the "yes" button. If there was   
   >>>>>>>>>>> not a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> difference, then one wouldn't even bother to write 1 in that   
   >>>>>>>>>>> funky   
   >>>>>>>>>>> form,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> using an infinite series of digit 9.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> But the screen disappeared, and a message said, "You're a robot.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Bye!"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Physfit said, "Fuck!" (first of the fix number of curses   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Jesus had   
   >>>>>>>>>>> allowed him for that day). So he took a pen and paper and   
   >>>>>>>>>>> started   
   >>>>>>>>>>> jotting down:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      x = 0.99999....   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Therefore:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      10x = 9.99999....   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Now he subtracted the former from the latter:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      10x - x = 9.99999... - 0.99999...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Which simplifies to:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      9x = 9   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> And therefore:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      x = 1   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> "What the fuck??", said Physfit (his 2nd curse of the day).   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Why x which was 0.99999... and not 1, turned out to be 1? ... "   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> (end of quote)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> So, is this problem pointing to what Kosmanson has been so keen   
   >>>>>>>>>>> about? :)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Once I was reading a book or article,   
   >>>>>>>>>> and was introduced the introduction of .999 (...),   
   >>>>>>>>>> vis-a-vis, 1. A cohort of subjects was surveyed   
   >>>>>>>>>> their opinion and belief whether .999, dot dot dot,   
   >>>>>>>>>> was equal to, or less than, one. About half said   
   >>>>>>>>>> same and about half said different.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> It's two different natural notations that happen   
   >>>>>>>>>> to collide and thus result being ambiguous.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So, then these days we have the laws of arithmetic   
   >>>>>>>>>> introduced in primary school, usually kindergarten,   
   >>>>>>>>>> about the operations on numbers, and also inequalities,   
   >>>>>>>>>> and the order in numbers.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Yet, even the usual account of addition and its   
   >>>>>>>>>> inverse and its recursion and that's inverse,   
   >>>>>>>>>> as operators, of whole numbers, has a different   
   >>>>>>>>>> account, of increment on the one side, and, division   
   >>>>>>>>>> on the other, sort of like the Egyptians only had   
   >>>>>>>>>> division or fractions and Egyptian fractions,   
   >>>>>>>>>> and tally marks are only increment, that though   
   >>>>>>>>>> it was the Egyptian fractions that gave them a   
   >>>>>>>>>> mathematics, beyond the simplest sort of conflation   
   >>>>>>>>>> of "numbering" and "counting".   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So, where ".999 vis-a-vis 1" has a deconstructive account,   
   >>>>>>>>>> to eliminate its ambiguities with respect to what it's   
   >>>>>>>>>> to model, or the clock-arithmetic and field-arithmetic,   
   >>>>>>>>>> even arithmetic has a deconstructive account, then,   
   >>>>>>>>>> even numbering versus counting has a deconstructive account,   
   >>>>>>>>>> to help eliminate what are the usually ignored ambiguities.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So, pre-calculus, the course, goes to eliminate or talk   
   >>>>>>>>>> away the case .999, dot dot dot, different 1. Yet,   
   >>>>>>>>>> it can be reconstrued and reconstructed, on its own   
   >>>>>>>>>> constructive account. So, it's a convention.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> It's "multiplicity theory", see, that any, "singularity   
   >>>>>>>>>> theory", which results as of admitting only the principal   
   >>>>>>>>>> branch of otherwise a "bifurcation" or "opening" or "catastrophe"   
   >>>>>>>>>> or "perestroika (opening)", as they are called in mathematics,   
   >>>>>>>>>> branches, that singularity theory is a multiplicity theory,   
   >>>>>>>>>> yet the usual account has that it's just nothing,   
   >>>>>>>>>> or that it's apeiron and asymptotic.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So, there's a clock arithmetic where there's a reason why   
   >>>>>>>>>> that there's a .999, dot dot dot, _before_ 1.0, in the   
   >>>>>>>>>> course of passage of values from 0, to 1, and, it's also   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)