Den torsdag 5 oktober 2017 kl. 09:40:23 UTC+2 skrev Zelos Malum: > Den torsdag 5 oktober 2017 kl. 09:33:08 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel: > > > > Hee, hee. Dipshit. Nothing you say has any relevance. I have proved that my improved definition meets ALL the criteria. Go fuck yourself! You will be seen as the fucking moron that you are. > > that means it is YOUR definition not dedekind definition, ergo they are NOT dedekind cuts and hence your arguement against it is invalid. > > This is the definition of a strawman. You make up your own shit rather than adress the proper point. > > Your shit doesn't meet it because, again, why can I find rational numbers excluded? The definition says it shouldn't exist any excluded.
Could you expand on this? Obviously every Dedekind cuts will not contain all the elements in ?.