Order:
Disambiguations
Martin Cooke [4]Martin C. Cooke [1]
  1.  69
    Infinite sequences: Finitist consequence.Martin C. Cooke - 2003 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (4):591-599.
    A simultaneous collision that produces paradoxical indeterminism (involving N0 hypothetical particles in a classical three-dimensional Euclidean space) is described in Section 2. By showing that a similar paradox occurs with long-range forces between hypothetical particles, in Section 3, the underlying cause is seen to be that collections of such objects are assumed to have no intrinsic ordering. The resolution of allowing only finite numbers of particles is defended (as being the least ad hoc) by looking at both -sequences (in the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  2. Modelling the recognition of spectrally reduced speech.Jon Barker & Martin Cooke - 1997 - Cognition 12 (9).
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Infinite probes: A problem with probability.Martin Cooke - manuscript
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  85
    To Continue With Continuity.Martin Cooke - 2005 - Metaphysica 6 (2):91-109.
    The metaphysical concept of continuity is important, not least because physical continua are not known to be impossible. While it is standard to model them with a mathematical continuum based upon set-theoretical intuitions, this essay considers, as a contribution to the debate about the adequacy of those intuitions, the neglected intuition that dividing the length of a line by the length of an individual point should yield the line’s cardinality. The algebraic properties of that cardinal number are derived pre-theoretically from (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. The Jump Theodicies.Martin Cooke - unknown
    Mawson recently argued that since a temporal God can’t know what we’ll freely choose, so he’s not completely omniscient and hence not omnipotent, whence his beneficence is a matter of luck. However, even (transfinite) arithmetic is inde-finitely extensible and only an everlasting, changeable God could learn forever. Furthermore an epistemically perfect being would hardly, I argue, be completely certain that there were no other perfect beings, because such negative empirical be-liefs could hardly be fully justified. So if God could learn, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark