On Nov 7, 1:28 pm, Paul Alsing <pnals...@pnalsing.com> wrote: > On Nov 7, 9:50 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics.November. > > > > > > 2011> wrote: > > "palsing" <pnals...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:email@example.com... > > On Nov 7, 3:13 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> sputtered: > > > >...Then you don't know that y = x^2 has 'y' becoming infinite > > > while the x is still finite. > > > This is just so wrong. Which is it, you didn't pay attention in math > > class, or you just don't understand anything about the concept of > > infinity? > > > Why don't you provide us a real-number value for x that results in an > > infinite value for y. Just one will do. I'll wait. Good luck. > > > \Paul A > > ============================================= > > > You can stop waiting, "infinite value" is an oxymoron and the > > term "value" is not included in the statement given. > > You just don't understand anything about the concept of value. > > > -- > > Einstein: God does not play dice. > > God: Yes I do, Einstein is a poor loser. > > The term "value" is certainly implied, isn't it? The formula declares > that given any value of x you can calculate the value of y. Neinstein > is trying to say that for a big enough value of x which is less than > infinity, y exceeds infinity. > > As you say, you cannot stipulate any kind of "value" to infinity, but > apparently Neinstein doesn't know that.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
Folks: Can anyone find a "value" for palsing's I. Q.? Ha, ha, HA! ? NE ?