Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Topic:
Irrefutable proofs that both Dedekind and Cauchy did not produce any valid construction of the mythical "real" number
Replies:
4
Last Post:
Oct 4, 2017 2:43 PM




Re: Irrefutable proofs that both Dedekind and Cauchy did not produce any valid construction of the mythical "real" number
Posted:
Oct 4, 2017 6:47 AM


On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 23:10:37 UTC4, Zelos Malum wrote: > Den tisdag 3 oktober 2017 kl. 19:16:15 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel: > > On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 12:32:26 UTC4, Markus Klyver wrote: > > > Den fredag 29 september 2017 kl. 14:06:42 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel: > > > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BmOEooW03iLSTROakNyVXlQUEU > > > > > > > > Comments are unwelcome and will be ignored. > > > > > > > > Posted on this newsgroup in the interests of public education and to eradicate ignorance and stupidity from mainstream mythmatics. > > > > > > > > gilstrang@gmail.com (MIT) > > > > huizenga@psu.edu (HARVARD) > > > > andersk@mit.edu (MIT) > > > > david.ullrich@math.okstate.edu (David Ullrich) > > > > djoyce@clarku.edu > > > > markcc@gmail.com > > > > > > Those are not Dedekind cuts. > > > > Of course they are monkey! > > Of course they aren't, because as said, we can show, trivially, it is not using even the most general definition!.
Hey Stupid. Even "Me" has finally understood that my definition is a D. Cut. Ask him to explain to you moron!
L={1 < x < pi} and R={pi < x < 4} where x \in Q
is a valid D Cut.
You can choose any other elements m and n such that m < pi < n and it will conform as follows:
L={m < x < pi} and R={pi < x < n} where x \in Q
END OF DISCUSSION.



