Galileo’s paradox and numerosities

Philosophical Problems in Science 70:73-107 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Galileo's paradox of infinity involves comparing the set of natural numbers, N, and the set of squares, {n2 : n ∈ N}. Galileo sets up a one-to-one correspondence between these sets; on this basis, the number of the elements of N is considered to be equal to the number of the elements of {n2 : n ∈ N}. It also characterizes the set of squares as smaller than the set of natural numbers, since ``there are many more numbers than squares". As a result, it concludes that infinities cannot be compared in terms of greater--lesser and the law of trichotomy does not apply to them. Cantor's cardinal numbers provide a measure for sets. Cantor gives a definition of the relation greater–lesser between cardinal numbers and establishes the law of trichotomy for these numbers. Yet, when Cantor's theory is applied to subsets of N, it gives that any set can be either finite or of the power ℵ0. Thus, although the set of squares is the subset of N, they are of the same cardinality. Benci, Di Nasso introduces specific numbers to measure sets called numerosities. With numerosities, the following claim is true: numerosity of A < numerosity of B, whenever A ⊈ B. In this paper, we present a simplified version of the theory of numerosities that applies to subsets of N. This theory complies with Galileo's presupposition that when A ⊈ B, then the number of elements in A is smaller than the number of elements in B. Specifically, we show that as the numerosity of N is the number α, the numerosity of the set of squares is the integer part of the number √α, that is ⌊√α⌋, and the inequality ⌊√α⌋ < α holds.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Numbers, numerosities, and new directions.Jacob Beck & Sam Clarke - 2021 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 44:1-20.
An Aristotelian notion of size.Vieri Benci, Mauro Di Nasso & Marco Forti - 2006 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 143 (1-3):43-53.
Realism’s understanding of negative numbers.Petar Bojanic & Sanja Todorovic - 2016 - Filozofija I Društvo 27 (1):131-136.
Rescuing Poincaré from Richard’s Paradox.Laureano Luna - 2017 - History and Philosophy of Logic 38 (1):57-71.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-11-07

Downloads
15 (#893,994)

6 months
5 (#544,079)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

What is Cantor's Continuum Problem?Kurt Gödel - 1947 - The American Mathematical Monthly 54 (9):515--525.
[Omnibus Review].Thomas Jech - 1992 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 57 (1):261-262.
What is Cantor's Continuum Problem?Kurt Gödel - 1983 - In Paul Benacerraf & Hilary Putnam (eds.), Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Readings (2nd Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 470-485.

View all 12 references / Add more references