Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

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

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Scott Berg Posts: 2,111 Registered: 12/12/04
Re: Matheology � 261
Posted: May 15, 2013 6:40 PM

"WM" <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote in message
> 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 ?

Date Subject Author
5/11/13 Virgil
5/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
5/12/13 Virgil
5/12/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
5/12/13 Virgil
5/14/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
5/14/13 Virgil
5/15/13 Scott Berg
5/15/13 fom
5/16/13 Scott Berg