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

Topic: Matheology � 261
Replies: 11   Last Post: May 16, 2013 8:42 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Scott Berg

Posts: 1,837
Registered: 12/12/04
Re: Matheology � 261
Posted: May 15, 2013 6:40 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply


"WM" <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote in message
news:2910c29a-42ce-4273-893a-8a16e2878804@w15g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
> On 12 Mai, 23:03, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>

>> > > The process by which you get any line is not independent of the prior
>> > > lines having at one time been in existence, so all those prior lines
>> > > once existed

>>
>> > But there is no difference for a line whether or not the preceding
>> > lines continue to exist.

>>
>> Once it has come into existence, its continued existence may not be
>> needed, but if it never had existed, neither could its successors.
>>
>> In a sane world the existence of 2 requires a prior existence of 1, and
>> existence of any natural n + 1 requires a prior existence of n.

>
> So 3 + 4 is 16 because the predecessors of 3 and 4 claim their right?
>
> Regards, WM


wrong,
3 + 4 = 10 base 7
or 3 + 4 = 11 base 6
or 3 + 4 = 12 base 5

So why you say 16 ?





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.