The Math Forum



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

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
zelos.malum@gmail.com

Posts: 405
Registered: 9/18/17
Re: Irrefutable proofs that both Dedekind and Cauchy did not produce
any valid construction of the mythical "real" number

Posted: Oct 4, 2017 7:47 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Den onsdag 4 oktober 2017 kl. 12:48:01 UTC+2 skrev genm...@gmail.com:
> On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 23:10:37 UTC-4, 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 UTC-4, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > Den fredag 29 september 2017 kl. 14:06:42 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel:
> > > > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-mOEooW03iLSTROakNyVXlQUEU
> > > > >
> > > > > 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.


And none of those will be a cut because

(L^u)^l=(pi,oo)^l)=(-oo,pi) \neq L

So L is not a lower cut as for it to be, we must have (L^u)^l=L, which it clearly doesn't.



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.