Formal human reason is circular as an artifact of its viewpoint.

'Logic' and 'information theory' each can counter the other's arguments with equipotent warrants of judgment: they both use 'space' and/or 'time' as pivots of reason and allow the spatio-temporal complement to vary.

Professor Zenkin understands how Cantor was thinking about infinity but, at that level, the understanding can easily be used for or against a concept. Zenkin chooses the latter, Cantor the former.

To 'step back' (not sure how else to describe this...) from the argument is to see the circularity (e.g. subsuming a type of infinity while ostensibly arguing against it).

The 'glasperlen' that Herman Hesse saw may simply be concepts viewed from a transfinite perspective: they would/could be linked above and below (and to the sides etc., if so desired), like strands of pearls.

To enter into a bead game discussion, please request permission from BeadMaster.

Currently there are two bead tapistries being developed:

Public Notes