Subject: Re: terminology question
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 08:25:50 -0500
From: Alex Bogomolny

Hello:

Thank you for the kind words.

I think a discussion on the math terminology could be a great topic for a newsgroup. The short reply is that in the parts I came from my terminology is quite acceptable as long as it's consistent.

For most, the distinction you make or its purpose are next to incomprehensible while "integer" is a short word that resonates with even the innumerate.

I, for one, would never use "cardinal" in liew of "counting." "Cardinals" have been invented by Cantor and are usually (in my view) associated with a broader class of sets than finite. And the word "counting" itself, although pointing to the origin of arithmetic, is inappropriate when it comes to even such trivial results as Euclid's algorithm.

"Natural" numbers is an acceptable terminology. "Integer" has the advantage of being both an adjective and a noun thus allowing for shorter constructs.

Best regards,
Alexander Bogomolny

|Reply| |Up|

Copyright © 1996-2012 Alexander Bogomolny

 40615876

A math books store at a unique math study site. Shopping at the store helps maintain the site. Thank you.
Sites for teachers
Sites for parents
Terms of use
Awards
Interactive Activities

CTK Exchange
CTK Wiki Math
CTK Insights - a blog
Math Help
Games & Puzzles
What Is What
Arithmetic
Algebra
Geometry
Probability
Outline Mathematics
Make an Identity
Book Reviews
Stories for Young
Eye Opener
Analog Gadgets
Inventor's Paradox
Did you know?...
Proofs
Math as Language
Things Impossible
Visual Illusions
My Logo
Math Poll
Cut The Knot!
MSET99 Talk
Old and nice bookstore
Other Math sites
Front Page
Movie shortcuts
Personal info
Privacy Policy

Guest book
News sites

Recommend this site

Sites for parents

Education & Parenting

Search:
Keywords:

Google
Web CTK
Supported by
3wVentures