Conference thebay::joyoflex

Why should there be a separate topic for discussing things like that?

Arie

    NO NEED TO TAKE THAT ATTITUDE AND ANYWAY IME FED UP WITH PEOPLE
    CRITICISING MY GRAMMER AND SPELLING I THOUGHT THIS WAS AN EQUAL
    OPPORTUNEITIES COMPANY AND WHY IS EVERYONE STARING AT ME LIKE THAT OH
    SORRY THOUGHT THIS WAS SOAPBOX I REMEMBER THE LAST PAYFREEZE GOD THOSE
    WERE THE DAYS ANYWAY THANK HEAVENS IME EMPLOYED THATS ALL I CAN SAY
    EXCEPT TO ADD THAT WHAT'S THE TOPIC?

   What does the phrase, "this rathole is going down a rathole," really
   mean?
   
   Does it apply here?
   
   Given that this is the Age of Information, are packrats those lucky
   folks who manage to climb out of ratholes with useful information?
   
   
   							Terza
   

RE -1 (Terza)

>   What does the phrase, "this rathole is going down a rathole," really
>   mean?
*If* a rathole is "an endless discussion on a small detail, causing the initial
argument to be forgotten", then it's quite clear what your sentence means. It
means that someone will start nit-picking on my definition :-)
   
>   Does it apply here?
I leave that to the interested noter.
   
>   Given that this is the Age of Information, are packrats those lucky
>   folks who manage to climb out of ratholes with useful information?
Are you trying to confuse us with small details? ;-)

Arie

    re: .3
    
    I interpret that to mean that, not only has the note gone into the
    form of tangential nitpicking that has been defined as a rathole,
    that rathole has gone into a form of sub-rathole.
    
    Bob

    The last several notes discuss the twists and turns (ie, ratholes) this
    subject on ratholes has taken. That makes these notes meta-ratholes. 

    I disagree. There's no such thing as a 'meta-rathole', since that 
    presupposes you're out of the rathole while you're talking about it,
    which clearly we're not. The last few notes *are* the twists and turns
    of a rathole, as is this one and as we can justifiably expect the next
    one to be. There's no way out of this one, other than the route .0 has
    taken -- stand back and watch the rats.
    
    Richard.

     re .-1
     
     You're wrong.  This reply is anything but a rathole.
     Indeed, it pertains only to the discussion of this topic.
     
     Dan
     
     p.s., Well, except for the signature.

    has anyone here had teenagers...my word they can drive one
    to distraction..
    
    and then there are the Blackflies and the mosquitos..
    
    how do you manage with two cars, 5 drivers and 4 different
    job locations.......
    
    
    sigh
    
    Bonnie

    Re: .7
    
    Maybe calling the topic a "meta-rathole" is just recognizing that the
    hole is really a klein bottle, and we've been outside all along. 

    if 2 x 2 = 2 squared then isn't a ratholed rathole = rathole squared?
    
    They don't get to be meta ratholes until they reach the 6th power.
    
    Remember, Bonnie, that teenagers are learning to be independant
    and part of that is making us desire for them to leave us or, at
    least, leave us alone.

    A rathole is like infinity
    
    add anything to it and it stays the same
    (1 + <infinity> = <infinity>)
    
    Multiply it by anything and it stays the same
    <infinity> * 2 = <infinity> 
    
    Divide it by anything and it stays the same
    <infinity> / 2 = <infinity> 
    
    Subtract anything from it and it remains the same
    <infinity> - 1 = <infinity> 
    
    
    

    One man's rathole is another man's gold mine.

    Re .12: Cantor proved that there at least two different infinities
    if I recall from my student days.

    
    re .14: 
    
    Let me guess -- a teeny weeny one and a real thumper of an infinity.
    I think Pascal had something to say about this, too.
    
    Richard.

It seems to me that a rathole, as described in .12, corresponds to a countably
infinite set, because each item of the rathole (say, spoken comment)
can be put into correspondence with an integer.

However, one can imagine that a truly deep rathole may be uncountable.  I
have found a truly wonderful proof of this which this note is too small to
contain...

	- Win

    Hmm sounds like we are discovering the mathematics of ratholes.
    Taking a tip from Whitehead, can we form a set of all ratholes
    that are themselves not ratholes?  For does not every rathole
    contain the seeds of another rathole?
    
    Is this note a divergence from the main discussion of ratholes?
    Or am I merely trying to end every line with the word "rathole"?

Re .14

Georg Cantor proved that there were an infinite number of infinities,
didn't he?

(As far as I know, I am not related to old Georg, but that's a
discussion for a different rathole.)

Dave C.

    
    Proving that there is an infinite number of infinities, if infinity 
    is itself a theory, just proves there's an infinite number of theories,
    dosen't it?
    
    And if this is the case, claiming any one of them to be in any way
    'true' or better 'proved' suggests that the rest -- still and infinite
    number of them, of course -- are ratholes!
    
    Back to the topic! Does this mean this note should be moved by the mod?
    
    Richard. 

>   Back to the topic! Does this mean this note should be moved by the mod?
   
   
   But then the moderator would have to declare the discussion on infinities
   a rathole and move the discussion to the rathole note.  Which is where it
   is already!  
   
   It could be said that recursion is also an infinity whose elements do
   not vary from each other.   So if this is a recursive (hence, infinite)
   discussion, as most ratholes are, then all these replies are really alike!

   
   							Terza
   
   P.S.- Then again, there are recurring sets of elements, where each
   set can be treated as an element in the aforementioned definition.
   The best example I know of is our very own word association note!
   

   By the way, calling a discussion a rathole because it is either recursive
   or infinite is an almost always useless way to make the discussion
   finite and not a rathole.
   
   So what other things exist that become their opposites as soon as
   they are named?
   
   :^)							Terza
   
   

   
<   So what other things exist that become their opposites as soon as
<   they are named?
   
   :^)	       SILENCE!   
   

    ratholes don't become finite when they are named .....
    
    calling them ratholes declares our boredom with arguing about
    infinities that we cannot make finite.  So we then leave them alone.
    It is possible to continue a rathole from where it left off into
    infinities.  A non-rathole, while it can be picked up again will
    develop either into a finite discussion or a rathole by the same
    means a new topic can.
    
    

    Cantor (not Dave) described only three types of infinities.
    
					andrew

    Maybe he only described three of them, but in fact there are an
    infinite number of infinities.
    
    The question is, WHICH infinity is the exact infinite number of
    infinities?

    
    >The question is, WHICH infinity is the exact infinite number of
     infinities?
    
    It's obvious. The LAST infinity.
    
    Roger