can't create an injective function
definitions of zero and infinity (both are sketchy, the concept of infinity has changed before, and may change again)
reductio ad absurdum: it produces an absurdity in context of our current number system

I've been keeping count, it would be absolutely absurd for me to post this and not read what people have said about it. You assume that I haven't read because I'm not ultimately convinced that our system of math and reasoning is perfect.

So pretty much: several times is 3 reasons in 2 posts? Briliant... And I can guess that you've all but refused to read the article since you're clearly not going to say anything about it? Why do you refuse to read it? Because it must fundamentally disagree with the only number system you know? It's much easier to assume I'm crazy and irrational, because that's what the Greeks would have done, right?

Do you find it reasonable to assume that 1=.9~, which our number system must assume? Are they truly perfectly equal? Because they would have to be for our number system to have perfect, infallible reasoning. It depends on a linear definition of time, saying that each 'now' has at least some quintessentially small duration.

The length of each 'now' is 0, it defies measurement. So if I live to be 87 years old, how many 'nows' have I experienced? Is the result any different if I live to be 92? Oh, but, wait, THATS right, you can't divide by zero... is that rational? What about the ball that leaves my hand and is thrown into the air, arching and landing on the ground? What is the total number of positions it occupied? Sure, it would be nice to place a number on them, but ultimately you cant. Our number system can't represent the perfection that is reality. It clings to a steady, linear model of time and space, something that science is increasingly showing us is not the case.

No doubt you will present more reasons why our number system disproves these ideas, or somehow erringly compensates for them; and get upset because you have convinced yourself that I am stupid. Additionally, you won't have anything to say about the article because you'll probably refuse to read it and tell yourself it's automatically wrong. So much for open minded discussion...

Seems like you're convinced you know the answers. It has to be wrong because it doesn't fit with what you know. You must know more than this guy...

"I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing." -Socrates