Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Matheology 203
Replies: 16   Last Post: Feb 7, 2013 8:06 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de

Posts: 13,489
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology 203
Posted: Feb 7, 2013 2:14 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 6 Feb., 23:10, Ralf Bader <ba...@nefkom.net> wrote:

> > I don't know what Brouwer believed. I know what he wrote
>
> but you don't understand it.
>

> > : Cantor's 2nd
> > number class does not exist.


> Of course, when discrepancies between Brouwer and, ummmh, you show up then
> Brouwer is wrong and you are right.


I cannot see any difference between Brouwers sentence "Cantor's 2nd
number class does not exist" and my position: "Cantor's 2nd number
class does not exist". Perhaps you are of different opinion, but that
is your personal problem.

Regards, WM



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.