On 31 Jan., 01:58, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > In article > <397a90fb-2e3e-411f-ae40-2365cadd1...@b11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > I have developed a new proof-technique, namely proof by ignorance > > That is hardly new for Wolkenmuekenheim, but has been the ONLY standard > there for years.
Thinks are easy if things are easy. Consider a box with a dozen different pralines. If I take three out of the boxh and return it to you, you can decide which I did not take out by looking at the remaining ones.
And finally consider a Binary Tree with uncountably many paths. When I colour a countable set of paths, then you have to decide by looking at the remainings which paths have survived.
And since you do not see anything, you have to show your true colours, namely either confess that your idea of uncountability with respect to the Binary Tree was wrong, or show that you are a determined matheologian who is not able to learn.