|
|
Re: a formal construction of Dedekind cuts
Posted:
Feb 23, 2013 7:09 AM
|
|
On Feb 23, 7:00 am, Charlie-Boo <shymath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 22, 9:55 am, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz<spamt...@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote:
> > In <M5qdncGgG5a-VbvMnZ2dnUVZ_rCdn...@giganews.com>, on 02/21/2013
> > at 07:21 PM, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> said:
>
> > >This is a formal construction.
>
> > No; it's full of undefined terms.
>
>
>
> > --
> > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
>
> > Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
> > right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
> > domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
> > reply to spamt...@library.lspace.org
>
> He meant "This is a format construction." He shows that the format
> used in set theory consists of braces.
>
> C-B
ROTFALMAO
|
|
