From: winsock@rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:24:28 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: 'Monster' numbers
Message-ID: <199701200524.VAA12384@sirius.infonex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 5:08 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote:
>In reference to numbers which you can't describe, if you examine the work
>they are ALL in the Complex domain, none of them are Real's.

This is incorrect.  The argument outlined applied to real numbers
only.  If you wish to refute the argument please do so.  You might
find it helpful to review the reference in Smullyan's book.

>If there existed a Real for which we could not describe this would imply
>that we could not draw a line of that length.

The subtlety of the idea lies in the fact that you can't make a
statement like "$foo is not describable" where $foo means anything.
Any number for which you can say, "I can draw a line which is $bar
units long" is describable.

Math Man