User not found

This user could not be found. They may have deleted their account.

age

NN Network:

Heterosexual

Free photo hosting

view: desktop |

Latest:

View All | Update Your Status

Help / Support | Settings | View or Edit your profile

Browse Blogs

View Latest Blogs

View a Specific Blog

Update Your Blog


	NN Matchmaker: I am a: find looking for me. must have a pic. Help NN grow - put this search on your site - FREE!

Read the latest from NN

View Blog Comments

Blog Title:

Others Have Said:
purr_tato	7-Apr-11 6:46:40 hugs my friend

artworks	7-Apr-11 7:57:20 There are an infinite number of infinities. Since "a number greater than any assignable quantity or countable number (symbol ∞)" is unmeasurable, it is simply a concept. Thereore, the concept of an infinite number of infinities is just as valid as infinity itself. The definition of "infinity (Mathematics)" from the Oxford online dictionary.

artworks	7-Apr-11 8:01:11 Ah crap..."∞" is how the NN blog interpreted the infinity symbol. I see that trying to answer this question is a process that could go on forever...

18thVestalVirgin	7-Apr-11 9:33:55 There are several things that might be wrong with the Oxford definition. First, it appears to render language, at least the word 'infinite', meaningless. Second, it raises questions pertaining to numbers, ie, is infinity a number? If so, what kind of number? What about the questions relative to meaning on the notions of 'endless' or 'countless'? If there is no end to numbers, do they exist in the same way as, say 28 does? 28 has a name. That seems to verify its existence. What about some of the ultra-numbers leading up to infinity? Do they have names? If not, do they exist? Finally, this phrase "simply a concept" troubles me.

By-the-Sea	7-Apr-11 15:10:49 Count the stars one by one

18thVestalVirgin	7-Apr-11 20:23:09 I am counting them. Are there more by the sea?

artworks	12-Apr-11 2:47:43 I'm sorry if my words trouble you. They certainly weren't meant to. Perhaps I'm in over my head on the subject. Or in life.

Epicurus3	6-Aug-11 6:19:52 Science uses inductive reasoning. However, with inductive reasoning, the possibility that the conclusion is wrong exists even if the premises were true. As far as mathematically proving the existence of God...Pascal swam those deep waters. He concluded it was better to wager on her existence. In order to accomplish this feat, wouldn't you need to know what God is? If you explore that question you might find what you need as proof. Keep in mind, the evidence you accept as proof might be rejected by others. However, that alone does not invalidate your conclusion.