[FOM] Re: Excluded middle & cardinality of the reals

[Giuseppina Ronzitti]

Mark van Atten wrote:

> If one thinks of the decimal expansions of the reals as choice sequences,
>
>then
>a continuity principle suffices to show that the reals cannot be enumerated.
>
>  
>
It can be noticed, however, that many small sets which from a classical point of 
view can be enumerated are not enumerable, or only 'weakly enumerable' intuitionistically as a consequence of 
the continuity principle (as Brouwer noticed, see for example Brouwer [1925]). 
For example the set (more precisely the spread) of all motonone binary sequences, intuitionistically 
understood, is weakly enumerable (Brouwer calls this set S_3 in his [1925] if I recall correctly).

This last observation can, perhaps, also be seen as an indication that 'small' but continuum-like sets, 
to which the continuity principle applies, cannot be enumerated, so to say, in the same way as the discrete-like sets.

Best,
GR

----
My home page:
http://www.geocities.com/giuseppina_ronzitti

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/fom/attachments/20040630/03fb8205/attachment.html