Virgil
Posts:
4,491
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: Matheology � 162
Posted:
Dec 1, 2012 3:26 PM
|
|
In article
<5303f5d5-e02d-43b2-bbc1-c2d8098dc696@f17g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 30 Nov., 22:47, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Analysis proves that the limit is larger than 1.
> > > Set theory proves that the limit has no digits left of the decimal
> > > point.
> >
> > Set theory proves no such thing,
>
> Try to learn set theory before babbling your usual nonsense!
Why would I need to learn any set theory in order to know more about it
than WM does, at least more about it that is true, since most of what WM
"knows" about set theory is false.
As Sam Clemens once said," It ain't what you don't know that hurts most,
its what you know for sure that jest ain't so."
--
|
|
