|
|
Re: ZFC and God
Posted:
Jan 29, 2013 6:41 AM
|
|
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes:
>> AGH! You just rejected my definition and said that a decimal is
>> terminating iff it is in the set of terminating decimals, and you
>> define that set with reference to the definition of terminating
>> decimal.
>>
>> Never mind. The point remains. The number 0.777... is not in T.
>
> Then show it! Show a digit that lies beyond all digits of terminating
> decimals.
That is unnecessary and irrelevant. All I need to show is that, for
every function f:{1,...,k} -> {0,...,9},
0.777 != sum_i=1^k f(i)*1-^-i.
I did that days ago. You snipped it.
>> The number 0.777... is the usual real number, namely
>>
>> 0.777... = sum_i=1^oo 7 * 10^-i.
>>
>> Now, is that a terminating decimal or not?
>
> Show a digit that lies beyond all digits of terminating decimals.
Irrelevant. Look at the fucking definition and see what one needs to
show.
> Or do you claim that it is impossible to distinguish terminating and
> non-terminating by digits? Or do you claim that it is impossible to
> work in the domain of terminating decimals?
> Why can't you support your claims?
I believe that it is obvious to the casual observer who is failing to
support his claims. We are going in circles here because you are
honestly too incompetent to understand how to apply a definition.
There is no point in continuing this conversation.
It is literally a shame that such a stupid man is allowed to teach his
addled thoughts on mathematics. Shame on you and shame on your
school.
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"I will admit I can get giddy over these forays into ideas at the
extreme edge. Being wrong can just add to the fun, oddly enough."
--James S. Harris just wants to have fun.
|
|
